View
25
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Soft Skills for IT People: initial experiences with putting theory into practice. Prof. Dr. Renate Motschnig Research Lab for Educational Technologies University of Vienna, Faculty of Computer Science renate.motschnig@univie.ac.at. ... in the context of technology enhanced learning. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Soft Skills for IT People:
initial experiences with putting
theory into practice
Prof. Dr. Renate MotschnigResearch Lab for Educational Technologies
University of Vienna, Faculty of Computer Sciencerenate.motschnig@univie.ac.at
... in the context of technology enhanced learning
Goals
• Development towards significant learning:better qualifications and relationships for all participants;more successful projects in the longer run.
• Support through new media (Internet)– effectiveness– actuality, in particular for new generation
Test and EvaluationInstruments
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Antwortverhalten allgemeinDer Lehrveranstaltungsleiter oder die Lehrveranstaltungsleiterin gibt:O destruktive, demotivierende AntwortenO ineffektive, überhebliche AntwortenO minimal effektive AntwortenO Antworten, die merklich zum Weiterkommen beitragenO Antworten, die einem Mut zusprechen, förderlich sind und in hohem Maß zum Weiterkommen beitragen
Visual Models of Scenarios &Repository Organization
Platform
Web Services
Knowledge Management
Object Technology
Courses
Adaptation of Theoriesfrom Soft Sciences
StaffDevelopment
Strategies
Action Research Cycles
Test and EvaluationInstruments
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Antwortverhalten allgemeinDer Lehrveranstaltungsleiter oder die Lehrveranstaltungsleiterin gibt:O destruktive, demotivierende AntwortenO ineffektive, überhebliche AntwortenO minimal effektive AntwortenO Antworten, die merklich zum Weiterkommen beitragenO Antworten, die einem Mut zusprechen, förderlich sind und in hohem Maß zum Weiterkommen beitragen
Test and EvaluationInstruments
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Antwortverhalten allgemeinDer Lehrveranstaltungsleiter oder die Lehrveranstaltungsleiterin gibt:O destruktive, demotivierende AntwortenO ineffektive, überhebliche AntwortenO minimal effektive AntwortenO Antworten, die merklich zum Weiterkommen beitragenO Antworten, die einem Mut zusprechen, förderlich sind und in hohem Maß zum Weiterkommen beitragen
Visual Models of Scenarios &Repository Organization
Visual Models of Scenarios &Repository Organization
Platform
Web Services
Knowledge Management
Object Technology
Courses
Adaptation of Theoriesfrom Soft Sciences
Adaptation of Theoriesfrom Soft Sciences
StaffDevelopment
Strategies
Action Research Cycles
Overview on research context
Overview
• Why soft skills? getProfile• Soft skills and e-learning: complement or
contradiction?• Web Services and Person Centered Learning:
our partners in the marriage• 3 scenarios for developing soft skills in courses
of the computer science and BI curriculum• evaluation and students‘ reaction• further practice and research• call for cooperation
ResearchResearch
Industry/practiceIndustry/practice
Knowledge-managementKnowledge-management
DevelopmentDevelopment
SignificantLearning
SignificantLearning
Technology Soft-Sciences
GOALS
getProfile: Top Ten requirements from Industry
getProfile on Communication
• Wie stehen Sie zu folgenden Aussagen?
– Erfolgreiche IT-Arbeit ist mindestens zu 50% erfolgreiche Kommunikationsarbeit. (119)
3 %stimmt eher nicht 1 %neutral
55 %stimmt vollkommen
1 %stimmt sicher nicht
40 %stimmt eher
getProfile on Learning
Wodurch lernen Sie persönlich am meisten? Wählen Sie 0 bis 2 Begriffe aus. (208)
15 %Bücher
20 %Kurse, Workshops
39 %Kollegen, Teamarbeit
4 %Sonstiges
22 %Internet: Tutorials, Foren, etc.
Goal: Improve (learning) processes by employing techology
Intellect
Social Skills
Personality, Dispositions
Didactic Baseline: Action-focused, Person-Centered
Traditional Blended (our blend)
Learning Targets
instructor participative, cooperative
Transfer Direction
instructor learnercooperative, multiple perspectives, flexible
TransferMode
lectureoffer, exchange, sharing,
interaction, forum, moderation, presentations
Instructor's
Roleexpert
facilitator, coach, mentor, mediator
Tasks constructed authentic, situative
Significant Learning
• “Significant learning combines the logical and the intuitive, the intellect and the feelings, the concept and the experience, the idea and the meaning. When we learn in that way, we are whole .“ (Rogers, 1983) S. 20.
• Ganzheitliches, bedeutsames Lernen, auch: Aspy, Barrett-Lennard, Tausch, Teml,..
Person-Centered Learning
• Basis: Actualizing tendency (Rogers):
• Can unfold itself best, if facilitator provides a working climate based on:– openness, transparency, realness– acceptance, respect– understanding, empathy
Expressions of PC core conditions (Motschnig)
• Realness authentic problemsopen, shared reflection, multiple perspectivestransparent communication and processes
• Acceptancelearner participation in all aspects of courseself-initiated learning goals and processesblended evaluation of students‘ projects
• Understandingcourse design takes whole situation into accountamong all participants; of novel situations
Blended Learing System Structure (BLESS)
Layer 5:
Learning Platforms
Layer 1:
Blended Learning
Courses
Layer 2:
Course scenarios
Layer 3:
Blended Learning
Patterns
Layer 4:
Web Templates
«Pattern»
Peer-Evaluation
Participants: evaluatepeers based on targets
Instructor: defineevaluation targets
Instructor: publishevaluations
{optional}
Evaluation
«Pattern»
Are evaluation targets assigned?
Participants:choose targets
Instructor: assign targets
{optional}
yes
«use»
«derive»
«use»
no
Publish
«Pattern»
Instructor. publish peer-evaluation details Publish
«Pattern»
«use»
Project-Based Learning Course
PreliminaryPhases
«Pattern»
Project-BasedLearning
«Pattern»
AssessmentPhases
«Pattern»
«Pattern»
Publish
Selectrecipient(s)
Choosedelivery type
Initiate/performdelivery
«Pattern»
Self-Evaluation
Participants: evaluation basedon assigned targets
Instructor: assignevaluation targets
Instructor: publishevaluations
{optional}
«use»
«derive»
«use»
Evaluation
«Pattern»
Publish
«Pattern»
Visualization,Modeling
Modularization,Decomposition
Selection,Implementation
Instantiation,Application
Application
Design,Composition
TECHNOLOGY
LEARNING THEORY
Features
Support
TECHNOLOGY
LEARNING THEORY
platform-independent
platform-dependent
CEWebS: Sample architecture at the Universtiy of Vienna
DKE
MIS
SMILE + SVGPlayground
LOM Editor
BISSematic WebTutor
RPD/SSMModelling
Business ProcessVisualizer
QA PracticalExample
XML Tools
The course/container ist filled with components from different locations, scattered over the organisation.
For the students and the facilitator the systembehaves transparent.
Surveys,Questionaires
TeamBuilding
CourseInformation
CommonRepository
Administration & Reports
Some learnings from practiceFrom a technical point of view:
• First: Web Computing infrastructure• Now: elements of Grid Computing
(Blackboard Messaging System)• The services cooperate transparently
(exchange pieces of information) Platform Platform
Service Service Service
Blackboard Messaging
From a users point of view – KISS:• Simplification of the activities involved in certain tasks
• One step to submit a contribution – the contribution is placed automatically in the correct container
• Focus on the workflow of a course – aggregated views of the progress
• Efficient UI – only relevant parts visible• Reports - qualitative and quantitative analysis
Current CEWebS Architecture:
CEWebS Applicationssome numbers
• In use for the 4th term
• Prooven design – scalable and stable– handled courses with 300 Students with high
loads (upload of contributions)– Avg. of 500 students per semester– > 1 GB of Data accumulated > 20 GB transfered
• 18 functional components (WS‘s)
• Parts distributed over 3 OS‘s
• Interoperable parts in Java/.NET/C++/Ruby
Blended Learning in Action:
• Web Engineering
• Project Management Soft Skills (PM/SS)
• Person-Centered Communication and New Media
Blended Learning in Action: Web Eng
• Course context and objectives
• Previous cycles, stepwise evolution
• Course Scenario
• Patterns applied
• Platforms used
• Evaluation and students‘ reactions
• Consequences
Web Engineering - General
• Goal: competence in WB-systems design– technically - soft skills
• Development regarding platform usage:LN on homepage, Student‘s projects on homepage, TeleWIFI, dayta, CEWebs– CHANGING !!!
• Didactic approach: PCeL – stepwise development towards more freedom within well-defined, flexible process.– CONSTANT, yet ripening
Web Engineering – Practice (320 students)
• Self-chosen projects in teams• predefined project milestones• Presentations and partner teams• Phase reflection online• Consulting time in lab-courses• tutorials, tutor-presence and forum• Project demo‘s and oral discussions• Interactive lectures
– written exam OR learning contract
Observations
• Lot of extra effort in design and coordination in the first year
• Lot of reuse of design and experience in second year, due to platform!
• Conclusion: The enormous extra effort for “rich didactics“ in the context of many students is significantly reduced in second year due to platform!
Web Engineering Scenario
Web Engineering Scenario
Project-based Learning
WELL Patterns
WELL-contract
• about 84% (of about 330 students)
• topic to suit the theme and the interest of the team as well as group of learners
• blended evaluation
• knowledge based via topic maps
WELL Contract StructureGroup / team number:
Instructor:
Team members with e-mail address:
Topic:
Goals:
Activities and documents:
Significant changes and their dates:
Intermediate version accepted on:
Final version due:
Signature team representative:
Signature instructor:
Top 15 WELL ContractsTopic
Number ofEvaluations
Bonus Points
PHP 62 186
JavaScript 39 83
Internet Exchange Markets 32 83
XML 25 70
Usability and User Interface Design 23 84
Battlenet 23 25
Elaboration of Web-Engineering Exam Questions 22 67
Intrusion Detection Systems 22 65
Formulating Questionnaires 22 38
Web Services (Interoperability) 20 80
Cyberlaw 20 60
IPv6 – The Next-Generation Internet Protocol 20 54
Analyzing Webshops in the USA and in the EU 19 46
Social and Security Aspects of Web Communication 19 44
Security in E- and M-Commerce 18 60
Feedback
Evaluation
General
Project-Based Learning
Course Types
Assessment
Interactive Elements
Reaction Sheets
«Pattern»
Questionnaire
«Pattern»
Feedback Forum
«Pattern»
Collect Feedback
«Pattern»
AlternatingPhases
«Pattern»
(from General)Collect
«Pattern»
(from General)
Feedback Phase
Evaluation
«Pattern»
Self-Evaluation
«Pattern»
Peer-Evaluation
«Pattern»
Instructor-Evaluation
«Pattern»
GenericEvaluation
«Pattern»
BlendedEvaluation
«Pattern»
Examination
«Pattern»
Alternating Phases
«Pattern»
(from General)
Self-Examination
«Pattern»
Instructor-Examination
«Pattern»
AchievementAw ard
«Pattern»
AlternatingPhases
«Pattern»
PreliminaryPhases
«Pattern»
Publish
«Pattern»
StaffMeeting
«Pattern»
Diary
«Pattern»
Collect
«Pattern»
InitialMeeting
«Pattern»
PresentationPhases
«Pattern»
TeamW orkspaces
«Pattern»
Course
«Pattern»
M eeting
«Pattern»
(from Interactive Elem ents)
Exchange ofContributions
«Pattern»
(from Interactive Elem ents)
Project-BasedLearning
«Pattern»
Project Milestone
«Pattern»
Learning Contracts
«Pattern»
Alternating Phases
«Pattern»
(from General)
Know ledge BaseConstruction
«Pattern»
InteractiveLecture
«Pattern»
Lab Course
«Pattern»
Project-BasedLearning Course
«Pattern»
Seminar
«Pattern»
Course
«Pattern»
(from General)Assessment
Phases
«Pattern»
Elaborate Goalsand Expectations
«Pattern»
TheoryElaboration
«Pattern»
Interactive Element«Pattern»
Brainstorming«Pattern»
OnlineDiscussion
«Pattern»
Consultation«Pattern»
Approval«Pattern»
Market«Pattern»
M eeting«Pattern»
Proposal«Pattern»
TeamBuilding
«Pattern»
ConsiderConventional
Style
«Pattern»
Tutorial«Pattern»
W orkshop«Pattern»
InformationGathering
«Pattern»
Chat«Pattern»
ProblemProposals
«Pattern»
Alternating Phases
«Pattern»
(from General)
Computer-M ediatedCommunication
«Pattern»
Exchange ofContributions
«Pattern»
Web Templates
1) Provide administration, user, and report views for pattern application Platform-independent specification
Web Templates2) Instantiation on a particular learning platform
Platform-dependent implementation
Peer-Evaluation submission form
Evaluation
WELL
Current term: about 75% expected WELL participants
2.2%
0.7%
1.5%
4.4%
9.6%
10.3%
22.8%
11.8%
50.0%
30.9%
14.0%
41.9%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
I consider the requiredtime investment in a
WELL contractcompared to learning
for a conventional examas (n=136)
I consider the long-termlearning effect from a
WELL contractcompared to a
conventional exam as(n=136)
much highersomewhat higherequalsomewhat lowermuch lowerno response
Evaluation of WE module
...correlate with students' motivations to participate
comprehensive evaluations are available at http://elearn.pri.univie.ac.at/pca/research
Motivation due to Course Style
3.59
4.05
3.66
3.18
3.19
1 2 3 4 5
Expected(n=131)
Instructor 1(n=38)
Instructor 2(n=36)
Instructor 3(n=32)
Instructor 4(n=25)
(1 = low ... 5 = high)
Motivation in WE: top
factors
Motivations to participate in Web Engineering
4.40
4.03
3.97
3.72
3.48
3.39
4.22
4.19
4.31
4.26
4.03
3.97
4.31
4.08
4.06
4.08
3.78
3.39
4.25
4.10
3.84
2.88
2.69
3.10
4.04
4.12
3.92
3.12
2.28
3.24
1 2 3 4 5
I wanted to improvemy professional
skills
Cooperation withpeers was very
collegial
I had great interestin the content
provided
I liked theatmosphere / theworking climate of
the course
The way the coursewas conductedappealed to me
Active participationof all students was
possible
Typical courseWE instructor 1WE instructor 2WE instructor 3WE instructor 4
agreedisagree
Aspects of Tool Support in Web Engineering:The tools supported me with...
3.42
3.25
3.18
1.85
2.51
2.99
2.27
2.94
3.06
2.65
3.76
3.43
3.76
2.02
2.80
3.15
2.52
3.17
3.13
3.07
3.44
3.18
3.11
1.76
2.21
3.13
2.16
3.08
3.26
2.59
3.23
3.28
2.77
1.84
2.52
2.85
2.21
2.60
2.83
2.28
3.15
3.00
3.00
1.67
2.41
2.74
2.12
2.93
3.04
2.63
1 2 3 4 5
(1) online materials
(2) online examples
(3) storage for differentkinds of resources
(4) discussion forums
(5) workspaces for team andgroup
(6) presentations on the web
(7) exchange withcolleagues
(8) self-evaluation
(9) peer-evaluation
(10) reaction sheets
All instructors (n=160)
Instructor 1 (n=47)
Instructor 2 (n=39)
Instructor 3 (n=47)
Instructor 4 (n=27)
Response behavior, Person-Centered attitudes, and competence in Web Engineering
4.29
4.80
4.67
4.49
4.16
4.21
4.72
4.44
4.05
4.38
3.77
4.20
4.33
3.98
3.35
3.15
3.81
4.11
3.59
2.11
1 2 3 4 5
ResponseBehavior
Transparency
Acceptance
EmpathicUnderstanding
ProfessionalCompetence
Instructor 1
Instructor 2
Instructor 3
Instructor 4
„Die Übung war wieder einmal sehr anders als alle anderen. Das freut mich immer wieder und ich sehe, dass es meinen Kollegen genauso zusagt (die Übungen sind auch immer voll). Sie haben bewiesen, dass sie auch ein konservatives Übungsthema wie Programmieren in einem neuen Stil halten können. Es liegt also nicht am Fachgebiet, sondern nur an der Einstellung. Anfangs war ich der Meinung, es geht nur mit Kommunikativen und diffusen Themen, aber man sieht, es ist auch bei ziemlich exakten Anforderungen möglich, einen Freiraum zu lassen (der nicht nur aus freier Projektwahl besteht). Man konnte ja auch selbst wählen, wie man die Meilensteine gestaltet. Die angeschlossenen WELL-Verträge haben natürlich dazu beigetragen, mehr Kontakt (aber sicher auch mehr Arbeit) zu den Studenten zu haben. (…) “
„Unsere Übungsgruppe war zeitweise chaotisch. Eine bessere Koordination wäre sehr wünschenswert.“
„Persönlich gesehen war es eine ausgesprochen positive Übung mit guter Stimmung und Arbeitsklima. (…) Aus technischer Sichtweise wäre eine bessere Unterstützung bei der Verwirklichung der Projekte wünschenswert gewesen.
Conclusions from the WE experience:
1. In Blended Learning, the platform is used primarily for information transfer, administration, and various forms of reflection
2. Personal dispositions make the difference, if the blended learning scenario relies heavily on cooperative, interactive processes
3. Added value1. learning on three levels, professional action,
2. increased motivation
is feasible, but doesn‘t come for free!!!
Project Management- Soft Skills
• Moderation and selected soft skills depending on students‘ interest
• Szenario
• Learning on three levels
• students‘ rating and reactions
PM/SSScenario
Person-Centered Communication
• 3 Workshops (a 4h) for Theory and structured tasks/exercises, then 3 encounter groups (a 11h).
• Szenario
• Learning on three levels
• students‘ rating and reactions
PCCScenario
Learning on 3 levels
4 intellect 21
16 skills 31
26 personality 4
XXXX
XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
X
XXXX XXXXX XXXXX
XXXXXXX
XXXXX XXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
XXXX
PCC PM/SS
Contribution vs. Profit
PCC PM/SS
Contributed 8.10 8.78
Profited 8.95 8.23
SUM 17.05 17.01
Scale:0 = not at all ... 10 = very much
Winter term2003/04
PCC PM/SS
Contributed 7.94 8.64
Profited 9.00 9.59
SUM 16.94 18.23
Winter term2004/05
3.88
4.35
3.41
4.71
4.65
2.12
4.65
4.35
4.00
4.12
4.41
3.94
2.47
4.06
4.06
4.59
3.18
4.71
4.71
1.94
4.71
4.29
4.06
4.35
4.47
4.00
2.82
4.47
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
Ich gehe unvoreingenommen an Dinge heran
Es fällt mir leicht, andere zu respektieren
Ich fühle mich nur in vertrauter Umgebung wirklichsicher
Ich mag es, wenn ich andere wirklich gut verstehenkann
Ich bin anderen Meinungen gegenüber offen
Es fällt mir schwer, andere zu verstehen
Ich lerne von anderen gerne etwas dazu
Ich kann mich gut in andere hineinversetzen
Ich komme mit neuen Situationen gut zurecht
Ich empfinde mich als authentisch und offen
Ich schätze die Präsenz von anderen
Es fällt mir leicht, auf Meinungen und Gefühle anderereinzugehen
Ich verlasse mich gerne auf andere
Ich kann andere akzeptieren, selbst wenn ich andererMeinung bin
Bewertung (1 = gar nicht, 5 = sehr)PZK
typ. LVA
Challenges for Organizational Development
• Strategies on how to achieve and assess added value and how to convince others.
• How to capture Blended Learning wisdom?• Staff development strategies.• First step towards international
cooperation; virtual community: PCA/HE: http://elearn.pri.univie.ac.at/pca
Finally ...
• Every viewpoint is welcome
• ... as is international cooperation
Recommended