19th WORLD CONFERENCE ON OPEN LEARNING AND

DISTANCE EDUCATION

Vienna (Austria) June 20th-24th 1999

" The New Educational Frontier : Teaching and Learning in a Networked World "

ICDE (International council for open and distance education).

ID-N° of presentation : u2a00370

Information Technology and Information Technology and pedagogypedagogy

A means to an endor how to capitalise on your existing pedagogical

experience

Jean-Jacques Hochart - Maître de Conférences

Centre de Télé-enseignement de l'Université

de Reims Champagne-Ardenne

Contents

The poster Introduction The problem Our approach : past Our approach : present & future

The text of its presentation

introduction Current situation

– Teachers are more and more urged to resort to Information Technology

I.T. is potentially efficient for education distance teaching is to become a component of

many forms of education.

– Problems in the evolution "from paper to software"

How to capitalise on the wealth of existing pedagogy when changing media ?

How to convince teachers to resort to Information Technology ?

The problem Convincing

– Students– Teachers

it is time consuming. technical expertise is needed. teaching habits have to be changed

"Educational" software– Market laws & pedagogical contents– Technological achievements & pedagogical success

Technological expertise– Versus teaching expertise– This may limit the number of potential developers– Teaching tools

Our approach : past The development of software for fellow teachers

– Software developed from existing documents Eliane Jaoui-Pylypiw (Paris I Panthéon Sorbonne)

– June 98 exam: Synonyms, translation, the verbal phrase, figures, fill in the blanks.

DAEU examination– May 96 exam : right or wrong, opposites, what do you understand ?, verbs,

R1MCQ, passive transformation, re-ordering.– May 97 exam : 7 mistakes, right or wrong, word definitions, articles, fill in the

gap, verbal phrase, rephrasing.

– The development of original software Collège Paul Fort (Reims) : pupils' studying time shared between

"traditional" teaching and CALL

– Software created to adapt to the form of teaching Faculty of law and economics, from 1993 to 1995

The development of templates to be filled in with data – a compromise between pedagogy and technology– No participation of teachers (in the "technical" development of software)

– Little participation : data base : Spanish grammar data base "very" multiple choice questions Questions with a double report of the answer analysis Creating one's own software : Selftest

– As much participation as wished

Future : Collaborative work– developing for colleagues– training colleagues

Our approach : present & future

The text of the poster presentation...

1. introduction (1/5)

1.1. Current situation – 1.1.1. Teachers are more and more urged to

resort to I.T. 1.1.1.1. By official recommendations (French

Prime Minister's speech, 19th January 99), because they have to follow the general evolution of society (a growth of 168% in the number of French users of the Internet for the last year), because they have to offer students modern teaching tools.

1. Introduction (2/5)

1.1.1.2. I.T. is potentially efficient for education

– 1.1.1.2.1. Possibility to get much information instantly

– 1.1.1.2.2. Availability of powerful navigation tools

– 1.1.1.2.3. Interactivity and possibility to build individual learning strategies.

1. Introduction (3/5)

1.1.1.3. distance teaching is to become a component of many forms of education.

– 1.1.1.3.1. In the brochure "Vers un enseignement supérieur sur mesure", French Ministry of Higher Education and Research, June 94, Maryse Quéré declared (p.3) "...enseignement sur site, enseignement médiatisé et enseignement à distance ... sont les trois composantes de l'enseignement sur mesure". Each student will have the possibility to resort to distance teaching. This form of teaching is becoming a reality (Gemme Groupement d'intérêt scientifique "Enseignement supérieur sur Mesure Mediatisé" about 50 members, universities and high schools)

1. Introduction (4/5)

– 1.1.2. Problems in the evolution "from paper to software"

1.1.2.1. How to capitalise on the wealth of existing pedagogy when changing media ?

– 1.1.2.1.1. The introduction of Information Technology must not lead us to ignore the existing teaching expertise. If pedagogy is the main concern of teachers technology must be considered as a means to an end.

1. Introduction (5/5)

1.1.2.2. How to convince teachers to resort to Information Technology ?

– 1.1.2.2.1. This question will become obsolete within a few years but in the transition period we are going through it is important to realise that those who will first turn to I.T. will have the edge on those who won't. Anyway, ignoring I.T. will result in a waste of time

2. The problem (1/7)

2.1. Convincing– 2.1.1. To exploit the wide range of the

potentialities of I.T. involves teachers can use it easily and students' needs are met in a more efficient way than with traditional tools.

– 2.1.2. Students : hardly any difficulty

2. The problem (2/7)

– 2.1.3. Teachers Convincing teachers : there is still a great number of

teachers to convince or to help introduce I.T. in their everyday practice.

When asked to use I.T. teachers may set out a number of objections

2.1.3.1. it is time consuming.– 2.1.3.1.1. They are all the more ready to think so as they

have examples of fellow teachers who, having a passion for I.T., spend more time exploring technological possibilities than trying to harness the possibilities of the machine in order to achieve a pedagogical objective.

2. The problem (3/7)

2.1.3.2. technical expertise is needed.• And some technicians are too ready to agree to that.

2.1.3.3. teaching habits have to be changed• It represents a lot of work to adapt teaching habits to

what is available and it obliges to get rid of the data which have been gathered for so long as well as the exercises which have been built and activities which have been elaborated.

2. The problem (4/7)

2.2. "Educational" software– 2.2.1. Market laws & pedagogical contents

Private software developers generally embark on time and money consuming projects. As they have to make a profit they have to follow market laws. Consequently, a "product" whose development needed much money has to be bought by many people, which entails that it will leave aside particular problems addressing a small number of potential buyers and on the contrary will tend to treat general questions, addressing a potentially wide audience.

2. The problem (5/7)

– 2.2.2. Technological achievements & pedagogical success

• Developers have a tendency to put forward what they are best at : technology. They tend to create a confusion between technology and pedagogy which may result in the belief that technological achievements ensure pedagogical success.

2. The problem (6/7)

2.3. Technological expertise 2.3.1. Versus teaching expertise

– Another point is that technological expertise is given such a high status that teachers feel they cannot do without, sometimes even forgetting pedagogy.

2.3.2. This may limit the number of potential developers

– It may result in a situation where only a few will have in charge the development of educational software. The pedagogical expertise that thousands of teachers have slowly acquired through everyday exchanges with learners will be ignored since only a few teachers will be given the possibility to integrate a team of strongly financed developers.

2. The problem (7/7)

– 2.3.3. Teaching tools The machine (computer) being used to achieve something

(teaching) becomes a tool. If the objective is forgotten, computers are not teaching tools. The confusion is not new : in his article "School's out, forever" The Guardian, January 1997, Neil Postman writes : " The President of the United States announces that the goal of education in the 21st century is to have a lap-top computer on every student's desk" : the confusion between the machine and what makes it a tool is obvious : is the goal of education to provide each student with a computer ? It would be the same to say that the aim of culture is to provide them with a room full of books.

3. Our approach (1/12)

– After the first contact with I.T. (beginning of the '80ies) I realised how powerful a teaching tool it could be if adapted to the teaching context. I rapidly understood that programming was not my job (too much time consuming for too little result).

– Turning to "open" software I felt frustrated not to be able to change the structure and be restricted to the choice of data.

– I discovered authoring tools. I got some expertise in developing software for my pupils and decided to use that expertise to help colleagues.

3. Our approach (2/12)

3.1. Past : to develop software for fellow teachers :

3.1.1. Software developed from existing documents– No participation was needed. I used the existing software structures I

had developed and adapted them.– 3.1.1.1. Eliane Jaoui-Pylypiw (Paris I Panthéon Sorbonne)

• Examination for first year students of economics : Synonyms, translation, the verbal phrase, figures, fill in the blanks. I started with the paper she had given to her students (June 1998 examination) and developed a software meant to be used by future students to prepare the same kind of examination.

3. Our approach (3/12)

– 3.1.1.2. DAEU • An examination to enter university. The general principle

was the same : to develop software from examination papers which would be used by future students to prepare for the same examination. The difference lies in the fact that it had been asked by the manager of the Reims University department in charge of the preparation, not by the teachers.

• May 1996 examination : right or wrong, opposites, what do you understand ?, verbs, multiple choice questions, passive transformation, re-ordering.

• May 1997 examination : 7 mistakes, right or wrong, word definitions, articles, fill in the gap, verbal phrase, rephrasing.

3. Our approach (4/12)

– 3.1.2. The development of original software• Collège Paul Fort : Reims

• Pupils' studying time was shared between "traditional" teaching and CALL activities. The fellow teachers' participation was limited. They took no part in the development of the software.

3. Our approach (5/12)

– 3.1.3. Software created to adapt to the form of teaching

• Faculty of law and economics, University of Reims from 1993 to 1995.

• The use of software resulted from teachers' and students' choice. They could resort to traditional tools. Whenever they used the software their comments and difficulties were taken into account to bring changes (structure and/or data)

• The Software could be used by teachers as teaching tools (in the classroom) and by students as self learning tools (outside the classroom).

• The use of an authoring tool enabled students to have their say in the development and evolution of the software.

3. Our approach (6/12)

3.2. Present : the development of templates to be filled in with data – 3.2.1. Introductory remark

This constitutes a compromise between pedagogy and technology. Empty "shells" are proposed. They can be filled with data chosen by teachers. The structure is always adaptable. There are two categories : to present data and to test

3. Our approach (7/12)

– 3.2.2. No participation of teachers The text is written in a WORD file. It can be an article : J-E Gombert, "Multimodalité

de l'activation des représentations lexicales chez les sourds"

Or a whole course : Françoise Cordier, "Introduction à la psychologie cognitive".

3. Our approach (8/12)

– 3.2.3. Little participation : With WORD : basic organisation of the data to be

introduced in the "empty shells" (templates). 3.2.3.1. data base : Spanish grammar data base

– A three column table. The number of columns depends on the number of fields the teacher has chosen. For example, one for the grammatical remark, one for the example illustrating the remark and one for the translation of the example.

3.2.3.2. "very" multiple choice questions– The number of columns depends on the number of suggestions

and commentaries the teacher wants to make. So, there are at least three columns : one for the questions plus two for the suggestions.

3. Our approach (9/12)

3.2.3.3. Questions with a double report of the answer analysis

– This template corresponds to any exercise for which there is a limited number of possible answers. The answer is typed in by the student. The function of the "question" is to urge the student to write a text. This "stimulus" can be written (passive transformation, re-ordering, interrogative transformation, etc.) or have another form, e.g. a wav file (self dictation).

3. Our approach (10/12)

3.2.3.4. Creating one's own software : Selftest

– It can be used by teachers to create their exercises or even by learners to work on a difficulty they have identified. There are two stages : 1. writing the data ("question", expected answer, even restrictions or help) 2. doing the exercise with the data which have been written or pasted.

– 3.2.4. As much participation as wished.

3. Our approach (11/12)

3.3. Future : Collaborative work to meet the new needs – The presentation of the multimedia form of

their data often brings about new demands which can be met through collaborative work. It can consist in…

3. Our approach (12/12)

the development of software for colleagues (Our project with the Technological University of Troyes) or

training courses to help them use the templates or adapt the existing software or even learn how to use the authoring system.

4. Short biography of the author

– Jean-Jacques Hochart has been teaching English since 1972 in various contexts (Primary schools, junior and senior high-schools, high business schools, university and vocational training centres). In all of them he resorted to Information Technology. When he was appointed at Reims University distance teaching centre, his research work (the pedagogical use of I.T.) also turned to helping fellow teachers use Information Technology in their everyday practice.