899 research outputs found
Sort by
Relationships between conceptions of learning approaches to study and students’ judgements about the value of their experiences of networked learning
Get PDFThis paper reports on an enquiry into relationships between students’ views of their experiences of participating in networked learning courses and data on their conceptions of learning and approaches to study. It has been suggested in the literature on networked learning that students with more sophisticated conceptions of learning and students who take a deep approach to learning are more likely to benefit from, and have positive experiences of, networked learning. Drawing on a sample of almost 180 undergraduate social science students on four networked learning courses, we established that there were no strong links between students’ judgements about their experience of networked learning and either their conceptions of learning or their approach to study. Further research is needed, but a practical implication of this study is that it is reasonable to expect all students to have positive experiences on well‐designed and well‐managed networked learning courses ‐ not just those students with more sophisticated conceptions of learning or deep approaches to study
Does distance e‐learning work? A comparison between distance and face‐to‐face learners using e‐learning materials
Get PDFThis study compares continual assessment data, intake numbers, retention numbers and final examination grades of a mixed cohort of face‐to‐face and distance learners against similar data from previous years where e‐learning materials were not used in order to test whether e‐learning materials can support the same quality and quantity of teaching and learning for both face‐to‐face and distance learners. The results for this cohort of learners demonstrate that: (i) distance e‐learners score as well and sometimes better than face‐to‐face learners; (ii) face‐to‐face student numbers have increased; (iii) overall, student retention and student attendance have been maintained; (iv) final examination results have been maintained or in some cases improved; (v) lecturer workload was high, but not unmanageable, and it is clear how manageability can be improved
On reification: A reinterpretation of designed and emergent practice
Get PDFThis paper is a response to the article: ‘Examining the five‐stage e‐moderating model: designed and emergent practice in the learning technology profession, published in ALT‐J 11 (1). Whilst we agree with the concerns of the authors on the problems of commodification and the increasing control of learning technology from a financial or predominantly management perspective, we wish to offer a reinterpretation of the research by taking a stricter analysis of the events described by the authors
Examining the five‐stage e‐moderating model: Designed and emergent practice in the learning technology profession
Get PDFThis paper highlights the need for learning technologists to establish their ‘academic legitimacy’ within the complexities of online learning and teaching practice. Frameworks such as the ‘five stage e‐moderating model’ can be useful in developing the knowledge base but there are dangers in them becoming too reified within an increasingly commodified higher education (HE) environment. The paper calls for greater professional reflexivity and contestation within learning technology practice and concludes by inviting the Alt‐J readership to engage in a critical debate with regard to these issues
Analysing tutor feedback to students: First steps towards constructing an electronic monitoring system
Get PDFVirtual Learning Environments provide the possibility of offering additional support to tutors, monitors and students in writing and grading essays and reports. They enable monitors to focus on the assignments that need most attention. This paper reports the findings from phase one of a feasibility study to assist the monitoring of student essays. It analyses tutor comments from electronically marked assignments and investigates how they match the mark awarded to each essay by the tutor. This involved carrying out a category analysis of the tutors’ feedback to the students using Bales's ‘interactional categories’ as a theoretical basis. The advantage of this category system is that it distinguishes between task‐orientated contributions, and the ‘socio‐emotive’ element used by tutors to maintain student motivation. This reveals both how the tutor makes recommendations to improve the assignment content, and how they provide emotional support to students. Bales's analysis was presented to a group of tutors who felt an electronic feedback system based on this model would help them to get the right balance of responses to their students. These findings provide a modest start to designing a model of feedback for tutors of distance education students. Future work will entail refining these categories and testing this model with a larger sample from a different subject domain
Enriching accounts of computer‐supported collaboration by using video data
Get PDFThis paper will discuss the approach to the evaluation of computer‐supported collaborative learning developed in our group over the past ten years. This approach depends on the collection of video data to allow the analysis of key features of problem‐solving behaviour within groups of students working on collaborative learning tasks. Our theoretical framework derives from two sources‐ the CIAOl framework for evaluating examples of CAL and an analysis of appropriate methods of evaluating computer‐supported collaboration. Our work in this area has been supported by developing the data capture facilities for the CALRG (Computers and Learning Research Group) at the Open University. We will draw on a number of studies to illustrate this approach and will present a brief case study from work done on a computer‐supported learning environment for statistics where we use video records of video‐mediated collaboration. This case study gives an example of the rich data that can be collected using video recording and analysed to increase understanding of computer‐supported collaboration
Closing the communications loop on the computerized peer‐assessment of essays
Get PDFThe use of self‐ and peer‐assessment is not new to higher education. Traditionally its use has required the complex and time‐consuming management of coursework submissions by the tutor, in an attempt to maintain validity and anonymity of the assessment process. In the last few years a number of computerized systems have been developed that are capable of automatically supporting, managing and performing the assessment process. The requirement for student anonymity and the release of the tutor from the process of marking have reduced the ability to develop the iterative process of feedback. This feedback is considered essential in supporting student learning and developing reflective practice. This paper describes the enhancement of a computerized assessment system to support anonymous computer‐mediated discussion between marker and marked having previously performed peer‐assessment. A detailed description is provided of the integrated assessment process, and an analysis of the use of this anonymous discussion is presented. Anonymous student feedback is presented and analyzed with respect to the perceived benefits of using the system with respect to enhancing the student learning process
Evaluating complex digital resources
Get PDFSquires (1999) discussed the gap between HCI (Human Computer Interaction) and the educational computing communities in their very different approaches to evaluating educational software. This paper revisits that issue in the context of evaluating digital resources, focusing on two approaches to evaluation: an HCI and an educational perspective. Squires and Preece's HCI evaluation model is a predictive model ‐ it helps teachers decide whether or not to use educational software ‐ whilst our own concern is in evaluating the use of learning technologies. It is suggested that in part the different approaches of the two communities relate to the different focus that each takes: in HCI the focus is typically on development and hence usability, whilst in education the concern is with the learner and teacher use
On reification: A reinterpretation of designed and emergent practice ‐ a reply
Get PDFWe welcome the response of Chris Tompsett and Graham Alsop to our article (Lisewski and Joyce, 2003). Within its ‘stricter analysis’, it is thoughtful and incisive, presenting an interesting critique of our ideas. However, we cannot help but think that the authors have missed the point. Indeed, if we wish to be mischievous we woidd argue that their response is an exemplar of some of the concerns we wanted to raise in our original article