Teaching with technologies - tools for empowering teachers -PBL as a meso-pedagogy

Marianne GeorgsenThomas Ryberg

E-Learning Lab – center for user driven innovation, learning and design

Department of communication and psychology – Aalborg University

Outline

• Meso-pedagogies as a concept

• PBL as a Meso-pedagogy

• Design tools (mediating design artefacts) to empower teachers – Collaborative E-learning Design method (CoED)

• Workshop – you design • Summing up and discussing

• The notion of PBL as a meso-pedagogy is explored in a forthcoming paper:

• Ryberg & Georgsen (in press): Enabling Digital Literacy - Development of Meso-Level Pedagogical Approaches. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy

Meso-pedagogies

• Meso-pedagogies are pedagogical concepts, methods and tools that sit in-between:

– A macro-level or policy level definition of ’good practice’ and a micro-level of teachers’ actual (often idiosyncratic) practices

– Highlights differences and hopefully mediate between a ’curriculum’ and a ’didaktik’ approach

– In a ’curriculum’ approach the teacher carries out or enacts the plans made by others (higher-level)

– In a ’didaktik’ approach teachers have a higher degree of autonomy in terms of content and pedagogical method

• The two models imply different problems in terms of teachers’ adoption of technologies for learning

Digital literacy as example

• The problem of a Curricular strategy:• Some of the definitions and frameworks for digital literacy are

what Lankshear & Knobel (2006) term “standardized operationalizations” of digital literacy

• These are detailed, prescriptive list of ‘ digital literacy’ chunks (information search, decoding images etc.)– in danger of alienating or marginalizing teachers by imposing

curricular limitations onto classroom teaching– Overlook the more organic and composite nature of what it is to

work meaningfully with digital media– Isolated ’task oriented’ chunks rather organic parts of different

activites– “Writing a doctoral thesis is a radically different practice from writing a shopping list. […] To

think of these practices as different manifestations of some «thing» called literacy is like thinking of building a bridge and building a warehouse as different manifestations of mixing cement.” (Lankshear & Knobel 2006, p. 17)

Digital literacy as example

• The problem of a ‘Didaktik’ approach• In Denmark and Norway teachers have a higher degree of

autonomy in terms of content and pedagogical method• Furthermore access to digital technologies in the classrooms is

good, but teachers find it difficult to integrate ICT in a pedagogically sound and interesting way, and may lack the necessary competencies themselves (Christensen & Tufte 2005; Hatlevik et al. 2009; Holm Sørensen, et al. 2010).

• Autonomy and freedom can become frustrating and troublesome when teachers are not themselves digitally literate, and therefore potentially have trouble identifying ways in which to work fruitfully with digital media

• Have to do this without some kind of methodological scaffolding

A need for:

• Meso-pedagogical approaches and tools (mediating design artefacts) which can support or scaffold teacher’s in designing for learning with ICTs– embedding digital technologies and translate broader pedagogical

concepts or ideals into meaningful classroom practices• Two potential ‘solutions’ • PBL as meso-level pedagogies or frameworks which can act as

“boundary objects” between macro-level policy descriptions and micro-level classroom practice (also action learning, discovery learning or progressive inquiry)– Such approaches are flexible and open to teachers’ repurposing and

interpretations, while also offering a certain level of structure and scaffolding (although they can also become rigid structuring devices!)

• CoED-method as a tools or mediating design artefact to support teachers in designing for learning with ICTs

• What is/are PBLs– PBL is Student-Centred Learning

– Where motivating and activating students is the prime concern

– The point of departure for the learning process are ill-structured real life problems

7

PBL as a flexible concept and a myriad of varying practices

“A learning method based on the principle of using problems as a starting point for the acquisition and integration of new knowledge.” - (H.S. Barrows 1982)

”PBL reflects the way people learn in real life; they simply get on with solving the problems life puts before them with whatever resources are to hand.”

(Biggs 2003)

8

PBL as a flexible concept and a myriad of varying practices

“…. problem-based learning helps students to see that learning and life take place in contexts, contexts that affect the kinds of solutions that are available and possible.” (Savin-Baden, 2003)

”Problem based learning is a pedagogical strategy for posing significant, contextualised, real world situations, and providing resources, guidance and instruction to learners as they develop content knowledge and problem-solving skills” (Mayo et. Al., 1993)

9

PBL as a flexible concept and a myriad of varying practices

10

Variations

Ways of implementation • Problem solving techniques in

the lecture• Problem Based Learning in

subjects / at institutional level • Project Based Learning in

subjects / at institutional level• Problem and Project Based

Learning

Modes of practice• Scenario• Case• Transdisciplinary • Intercultural projects• Mega project• Individual / team • Online/ICT Based / Face

to face

Adapted from Xiangyun Du

11

DIVERSITY OF PRACTICE – ‘MODELS’

Problem Process Team Assessment Role of teaching

Aalborg Onesemester Problems(5months) - open andnarrow

ProjectManagementand processskills

4-7 SsSelf-form,Discussing,writing andtogether,

Individualjudgementin a teambased exam

Facilitationbased –Consultancy(low level Of instruction)

Maastricht One week- Casebased

Seven jumps 5-10 SsDiscussingtogether

Individualexam progressTesting

Facilitationbased –tutoring (low level ofinstruction)

RepublicPolytechni

c

One day -structured

3 meetings aday –ProblemSolvingprocess

5 SsDiscussingtogether

Quiz andIndividualWrittenreflection

Problem giverand instruction

Adapted from Xiangyun Du

12

A conceptualisation of PBL• PBL can be conceptualised as three central

dimensions or processes that are stretched between teacher and participant control:– Problem – who defines and re-formulate?

– Work Process – who chooses theory, methods and ways of working?

– Solution – who owns the solution?

Other central points of distinction

• The extension of the ’problem based learning’ process – a day? Weeks? Months?

• PBL as an Instructional method vs PBL as curriculum• Type of work – collaboration or cooperation• Level of implementation?

– Class

– Course (one problem pr. lecture, one problem throughout, other?)

– Institutional/curricular implementation

Hands on-tool for teacher involvement in design processes

Marianne Georgsen

Nov. 26th 2010

A tool for reflection

Our problem:• Teaching is culturally (contextually) sensitive• There is no perfect match between choice of

technology and learning support• Designing for learning is a complex activity• But our partners couldn’t see it…!

Our solution

• We planned activities with our partners, aiming to raise their awareness about these issues (hoping to be able to discuss the matter)

• We designed a hands on-tool for the participants:– to help address the assumptions about teaching and

learning

– to initiate discussions (negotian of meaning) about what is (most) important

The result of our work

• We helped the participant to design culturally sensitive learning modules

• The project teams managed to come up with designs for their own cases (and they liked them too)

• We developed tool we have since used in many other situations – and other people have started using it too

• AND• We created a new set of problems/questions for

ourselves (and you – please…) to work with

Collaborative e-learning Design Method

• CoED aims to support domain, qualification level and subject experts in designing targeted e-learning and education

• CoED brings focus and structure to the early stages of the design process

• CoED aims to develop design specifications and/or early prototypes within few hours of work

• Learn@Work-project (Georgsen & Nyvang, 2007)

The foundations for CoED

• Systems development – because we design (for the use of) ICT– Participatory design– Iterative development

• Collaborative learning – because we design for learning and learn in the design process– Enabling knowledge creation– Facilitate negotions of meaning

• Facilitating creative processes – because the aim is to develop something new– Future workshops– Rapid prototyping

5 principles of CoED

• Facilitate conversations about e-learning design• Structure conversations about e-learning design• Produce design specifications and/or actual

designs rapidly• Involve e-learning experts, domain specialists and

future users of the e-learning design • Involve at least two people in the design process

3 Phases

1. Focus the e-learning design process

2. Identify ideals of teaching/learning which will serve as your design principles

3. Specify design

What happens next?

Prototype design,

based on the

negotiated set of values

Hands on

• Groups of 3-5• The goal is to identify – through discussion – your

ideals and values in teaching and/or learning– What should your design support…

• The methodology is card sorting• The rules are strict

– And you are creative, innovative people…

• Work for 30 minutes in total

Design task

• Negotiate the values for a:• PBL project/problem based learning scenario for 7th grade students (13-14

old) lasting for one week (24/7).– (you might also need to think about / discuss the practical organisation)

• They are to produce an online newspaper and write articles for the newspaper

• The scenario includes that they will need to learn: – How to use various tools for publishing (blogs, HTML, webpage-editor)– About critical digital literacies (reliability of sources, information search, bias)

• What are the central pedagogical ideals for you as the ’teacher team’ • Other things to think about:

– How are task and responsilities distributed between teachers/students?– How are they to collaborate?– How should technologies be used e.g for collaboration and production – how

should they be introduced

New research questions…

• How can we succesfully communicate the results of the design workshop to relevant actors?

• How can we carry the design ”back into” the institution and hold on to the ideals formulated by the participants?

• In what way is this really a tool for empowerment – what are the relevant issues to watch in connection with implementing the design/developing tools and technologies for teaching and learning?

Awareness of the participants

Low degree of domain knowledge

High degree of domain knowledge

Low degree of pedagogical/didactical knowledge

Situation 1: The CoED product should be reviewed and tested by domain specialists, future users and learning designers.

Situation 2: The CoED product should be reviewed by experienced learning designers.

High degree of pedagogical/didactical knowledge

Situation 3: The CoED product should be reviewed by domain experts and/or tested by domain experts and end users.

Situation 4: The CoED product can be implemented without further research or test.