PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY

A framework for judging excellence in online interaction?

Dr. Andrew Sackville

Head of Teaching and Learning Development

International Conference on Online Learning

Orlando - November 2001

www.sloan-c.org/conference/ proceedings/2001/ppt/01_sackville.ppt

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY Aims of the presentation

• To analyse the nature of interaction in online programmes and to relate this to some design principles

• To review approaches to judging “quality” in online programmes

• To stimulate discussion on the formulation of standards of excellence in online programmes

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY The context - my own practice

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY The context - a growing concern for “quality”

• Consumer/student demands• Quality Assurance, UK- Q.A.A., Codes of Practice;

Guidelines on quality assurance of distance learning (1999)

• Professionalisation of teaching/learning facilitation. Institute for Learning & Teaching in Higher Education

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY Why interactivity?

• Research demonstrates the power of active learning, group learning and collaborative learning

• Research demonstrates that interaction is important for learner satisfaction and for the persistence of (distance) students

• Interaction is central to the social expectations of education in the broadest sense

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY Social Constructivism

Social constructivism offers a metaphor of people in conversation socially constructing a shared version of the world.

“A central (constructivist) method is ‘real task’ which includes discourse and exploration, talking and listening, questions, argument, speculation and sharing, but in which domination is replaced by reciprocity and co-operation”

Jarvis (1998;p73)

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY Learning Communities

Communities may develop as a consequence of interactivity; and/or interactivity is a function of community.

“Communities involve the mutual engagement of participants, a commitment to joint enterprise, and a shared repertoire of approaches/techniques.”

Wenger (1998)

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY A pedagogic model

Learning Interactivity

Conditions of learning

Climate of trust

Social Learning

Constructivism Community

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY The development of “activities”

• Active learning in face-to-face teaching• Developing activities in print-based distance

education• Constructing activities - “artificial” v. “real life”• Feedback on activities• The unpredicted consequences of some activities

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY Dimensions of interaction

• Learner - technology (Tutor - technology)• Learner - content• Learner(s) - Tutor(s) & Tutor(s) - Learner(s)

one-to-one; small group; total group• Learner(s) - Learner (s)

one-to-one; small group; total group• Participants (Learners/Tutors) - “Practice

community”

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY Design

• “Learning cannot be designed; it can only be designed-for; that is - facilitated or frustrated”

(Wenger 1998 p229)• We can “pull” (extend invitations); “push” (build-

in requirements) and “avoid”. (OTIS 2001)• “There is an inherent uncertainty between design

and its realisation in practice, since practice is not the result of design but rather a response to it”

(Wenger 1998 p233)

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY D1 - Learner - technology

• Preparation/acclimatisation - Mini-module/ introduction focussing on interaction with the technology

• Experiencing the online environment in a non-threatening way

• Activities to engender trust/ “comfort”• Start “simple”

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY D2 - Learner - Content

• “Traditional” activities taken from face-to-face teaching and adapted. E.g. questioning materials; abstracting; reviewing etc

• Decide what you want students to actually “do” with the content - comprehend, criticise, memorise - then choose the activity

• Learners can work with content in a group - it is not only an individual activity

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY D3 - Learner(s) -Tutor(s)

• Variety of forms of communication. Start with the individual, then move to groups. E-mail to discussion/bulletin board

• The design decision whether to use asynchronous and/or synchronous communication

• Groups - “anonymity” but also “tensions”• Use different types of small groups - tutor groups;

special interest groups; task-orientated groups

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY D4 - Learner(s) - Learner(s)

• Should the tutor be excluded?• Agree netiquette with participants• Another design decision - synchronous and/or

asynchronous?• Extending interaction across cohorts - building up

resources for the next cohort - is this necessarily a good teaching process?

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY D5 - Participants - Practice community

• Linking to practice - e.g. medicine; dentists; teachers; etc

• Why the links? - additional expertise; “real” examples; familiarity with professional information sources

• Continuing after conclusion of the programme (e.g. PGCE) - developing into a continuing online learning community

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY Making a judgement on quality/excellence

• Complex - multi-dimensional• Quality criteria vary depending on the design

paradigm adopted (Visscher-Voerman 1999) - Instrumental - pre specified, absolute standard - Communicative - standards agreed by team and stakeholders - Pragmatic - proven useful & effective with users - Artistic - meets developers own quality criteria

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY Judging quality - who?

• Students/participants• Course team/tutors • Peers/independent evaluators• Professional community

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY Judging quality - when?

• Pre-presentation• During the learning experience• After the experience

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY Judging quality - what is being judged?

Example 1 - Q.A.A. (UK)• System design - an integrated approach• Academic standards in programme design,

approval and review procedures• The management of programme delivery• Student development and support• Student communication and representation• Student assessment

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY Judging quality - what is being judged?

Example 2 - Quality Guidelines for Online Education (Canada)

• Quality outcomes• Quality processes and practices• Quality inputs and resources

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY Judging quality - collecting the evidence

• Mapping exercises and checklist

pedagogic design; presentational design; delivery design

• Peer/professional community review • Self reflection and evaluation• Student/participant evaluation (focus groups;

questionnaires)

experience - educational; social; technical

• Analysis of actual interaction (discourse analysis)

quantity; quality; handling non-participation

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY A framework for judging quality/excellence in online

interactionTime

WhoPre-Delivery During – Delivery Post - Delivery

ST

UD

EN

TS Possible consultation

process on learningneeds

Feedback to tutors Standards/quality of

outputs produced(formative/summativeassessments)

Evaluation –questionnaires;interviews; focus groups

TU

TO

RS

Presenting an explicitmodel of pedagogy

Benchmarking with theresearch literature

Benchmarking with thetheoretical literature

Critical reflection onactual delivery

Ongoing evaluation withparticipants

Analysis of actualpatterns of interaction

Evaluation meeting withall stakeholders

PE

ER

S

Peer review of designprocess and academicreview ofcontent/activities(external consultant)

Peer review of deliveryprocess (an independentobserver)

Peer review of designand delivery processesand management ofprogramme/studentexperiences (externalexaminer)

PR

OF

ES

SIO

N Involvement in designconsultation process

Involvement invalidation/accreditationprocess

Feedback to team, ofanything drawn to theirattention

Feedback onmodifications toprofessional practice

PEDAGOGIC DESIGN & INTERACTIVITY

Contact Details

Dr. Andrew Sackville

Email - sackvila@edgehill.ac.uk

Web site - http://www.edgehill.ac.uk/tld/

Krishna’s links• http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/62/interactivity.htm

– The Role of Interactivity in Web-Based Educational Material (research paper)

• http://www.vjc.edu/administration/oit/edtech/index.aspx?id=5534– Guidelines for Establishing Interactivity in Online Courses by Mark

Mabrito (research paper)• http://people.uis.edu/rschr1/onlinelearning/archive/2004_12_26_archi

ve.html– Online learning update (journal?)

• http://ultibase.rmit.edu.au/Articles/may99/lander2.htm– Online Learning: Ways to Make Tasks Interactive (research paper)

• http://www.studyoverseas.com/distance/interactivity.htm– Interactivity in Online Courses

• http://thenode.org/networking/february1998/feature2.html– Online Interactivity in Learning Environments: