z

Using a Social Annotation Tool in the Ideas and Exposition

(IEM) Classroom

Marissa Kwan Lin E

Centre for English Language Communication (CELC)

National University of Singapore (NUS)

z

Background: Motivation for the Study

z

Learning as Social Construction of Knowledge: Expression and Communication

as a Means of Learning

If learning is something socially constructed, then the means for

students to express and communicate their thoughts,

opinions and understandings with others is crucial for them

to build the knowledge required.

Backgro

und

: P

rem

ise

z

Learner Differences: Providing Multiple Means of Expression and Communication

as a Form of Inclusion

“There is no medium of expression that is equally suited for all

learners or for all kinds of communication. On the contrary, there

are media, which seem poorly suited for some kinds of expression, and

for some kinds of learning. While a learner with dyslexia may excel at

story-telling in conversation, he may falter when telling that same story

in writing. It is important to provide alternative modalities for

expression, both to level the playing field among learners and to

allow the learner to appropriately (or easily) express knowledge,

ideas and concepts in the learning environment.”

http://udlguidelines.cast.org/action-expression/expression-

communication

Backgro

und

: P

rem

ise

z

Univ

ers

al D

esig

n f

or

Le

arn

ing

(U

DL)

z

CAST UDL Checkpoint 5.1

Univ

ers

al D

esig

n f

or

Le

arn

ing

(U

DL)

z

Need to reduce barriers, increase opportunities for communication that leads

to learning Typical classroom, seminar-style lesson:

Advantages those who are more extroverted; more likely to speak up

Pressures of real-time activity

Reliant on verbal skills; quick thinking on one’s feet

Advantages those who are more familiar /more at ease with the

content

Learning confined to the classroom schedule; what about out of

class learning that can encourage independent learning?

Leveraging on commonality:

Our students as digital natives

Deconstructing a text together – building community

Backgro

und

: P

rem

ise

z

Context of the Study

z

Ideas and Exposition Module (IEM)

IEM:

Using specific academic content to teach general skills in

academic expository writing, adopting a Content and Language

Integrated Learning (CLIL) approach (Marsh, 2002) as part of the

University Town Writing Programme.

Mainly 1st year students from a diverse range of faculties with little

to no exposure to the academic content area relevant to the IEM

module and/or academic expository writing

Exposure to the academic area is done mainly via reading of

journal articles and online web texts written by a mix of

academics and expert laypersons

Conte

xt: IE

M

z

Conte

xt: IE

M

z

Challenge: Becoming Familiar with Threshold Concepts relevant to UTW1001A

The specific academic content in this type of module can be

considered to be ‘threshold concepts’ (Meyer & Land, 2006) since

this content is challenging, yet necessary for students to engage

effectively with assigned academic journal articles and in-depth

articles from non-academic sources written by academics or expert

laypersons for an educated layperson audience.

Examples of threshold concepts from UTW1001A:

governmentality, (hyper)-competition, market-logic, profit and loss

rationality, privatization, adaptability, meritocracy, etc.

impact of neoliberalism as a hegemonic ideology on society

Conte

xt: IE

M

z

Online Social Annotation Tools

z

Functionalities

Allows for annotations to be made on an online electronic

webpage by users via an installed app on a computer’s web

browser or a software programme on the computer.

Enables groups of readers and writers to “proofread, provide

corrective feedback, peer review, mark key points and

assess and measure knowledge and application abilities”

(Lebow, Lick & Hartman, 2009; as cited in Mendenhall and

Johnson, 2010: 264).

Onlin

e S

ocia

l Anno

tatio

n T

oo

ls

z

Hypoth

es.is: A

nnota

tion

z

Hypoth

es.is: T

hre

aded D

iscussio

n

A

B

C

D

z Using an Online SA Tool: Potential Benefits

1. Allows those who are less extroverted to contribute

a digital platform used together with verbal interaction in the classroom provides

opportunities for both the more extroverted and less extroverted to contribute to

constructing knowledge

2. Provides a digital ‘record’ so learning can take place at any time any place*

those who aren’t so comfortable with quick thinking on one’s feet in real-time can take

more time to respond; offers the possibility of thinking through and revising one’s response

before clicking ‘send’.

gives students opportunities to re-visit what has been discussed

3. Provides a means to anchor the discussion to the specific part of the reference text

useful for critical reading involving unfamiliar concepts – reduces cognitive load since

students can easily refer to the original text and interact with other students’/ tutor’s

responses

4. Collaborative learning

working together to construct knowledge; not just learner-to-learner but learner-to-expert

as wellOnlin

e S

ocia

l Anno

tatio

n T

oo

ls

z

Analysis

z

Types of Interactions: Student

Categories Behaviours

Self-Reflection Learners reflect on and interpret what they have

learnt from the text

Elaboration/Clarification Learners build upon an existing comment by adding

supporting examples and justification

Seeking Learners ask for more information, clarification

Alternative/Complementary

Proposal

Learners offer a complementary or alternative view

Internalization/Appropriation Learners paraphrase the concepts/ideas presented

by their classmates or acknowledge learning

something new

Conflict/Disagreement Learners show disagreement or conflicting opinions

Support Learners express agreement without further

explanation, establish rapport, or share feelings

Analy

sis

: F

ram

ew

ork

s

Adapted from Gao, 2013

z

Types of Interactions: Teacher

Categories Behaviours

Teacher-

centred:

Instructor is

talking about

content

Evaluating Instructor repeats, accepts and/or rejects student’s response,

or acknowledges that they don’t know the answer to a

student’s question

Forecasting Instructor associates current topics to future topic

Real-worlding Instructor relates ideas to conventional knowledge, broader

perspective, and instructor’s or student’s personal

experiences

Sharing Instructor shares information, answers student question or

provides instructions for finding the solution

Adapted from Kranzfelder et al., 2019

Analy

sis

: F

ram

ew

ork

s

z

Types of Interactions: Teacher

Categories Behaviours

Student-

centred:

Instructor

asks

students to

talk about

content

Generative Instructor asks student to recall facts, and basic concepts, or

related information

Requesting Instructor asks student to justify or explain their reasoning

Constructing Instructor asks students to build knowledge by interpreting

and/or making judgements based on evidence, data, and/or

model

Contextualising Instructor asks students to connect ideas to conventional

knowledge, broader perspective, and their personal

experiences.

Clarifying Instructor asks students to elaborate on condensed, cryptic,

or inexplicit statement

Adapted from Kranzfelder et al., 2019

Analy

sis

: F

ram

ew

ork

s

z

Task Prompt: Concept and Language

Analy

sis

z

Set-Up

Students work in groups in class to deconstruct a pre-assigned reading.

They can choose to:

Discuss first, then annotate with a group annotation; OR

Annotate individually, then discuss as a group to review the annotations and

amend them, if need be.

Annotations are then reviewed by another group – This other group

comments on the annotations made either individually or as a group.

Rationale: Limited time to brief students on the app so utilization in class

helps tutor:

keep track of what is happening as students work on the article

offer timely help so any issues with using the app is dealt with to avoid

unnecessary frustration

students can still do their own learning after class if they wish to

working together to build solidarity

Analy

sis

z

Demographic: Diversity

Student A: School of Computing

Student B: School of Computing

Student C: Environmental Studies

Student D: Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences

Student E: Faculty of Engineering

Student F: Environmental Studies

Student G: Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences

Analy

sis

z

Enablin

g the m

ore

intr

overt

ed

stu

dent

Student A (the more introverted student)

Student B

Tutor

z

Enablin

g the m

ore

intr

overt

ed

stu

dent

Characteristic A key characteristic of neoliberalism is competition as it promotes

greater emphasis on privatization and promotes minimum government

intervention. It creates a competitive atmosphere which leads to a more unequal

society. This shifts the credit (or blame) of achieving (or not achieving)

something on one's capabilities, overlooking any pre-existing advantage.

Neoliberalism sees competition as the defining characteristic of human relations. It

redefines citizens as consumers, whose democratic choices are best exercised by buying

and selling, a process that rewards merit and punishes inefficiency. It maintains that “the

market” delivers benefits that could never be achieved by planning.

How does a competitive atmosphere exactly lead to a more unequal society?

I think Student A’s response does indicate this - competition can lead to inequality if

pre-existing advantage is not taken into account. But this explanation could

perhaps have been illustrated with the use of a specific example?

Original Text

Student A:

Self-

Reflection

Student B:

Seeking

Tutor:

Evaluating

+

Requesting

Student A’s self-reflection not only answers the question posed but

also provides an explanation of the form this competition can take

by bringing in other relevant threshold concepts

Tutor guides Student B to the response she’s looking for in Student A’s self-reflection

and asks for a specific example as the first assignment involves application of

theoretical knowledge using specific examples from the students’ real-life experience.

Student B attempts to seek clarification

z

Enablin

g the m

ore

intr

overt

ed

stu

dent

Student reflects on, interprets what he/she has learnt from the text and explains

extensively:

Reflecting on the threshold concept of ‘Competition’ as understood in neoliberal ideology;

brings in related concepts, e.g. privatization, minimum government intervention, social

inequality

Neoliberalism sees competition as the defining characteristic of human relations. It redefines

citizens as consumers, whose democratic choices are best exercised by buying and selling, a

process that rewards merit and punishes inefficiency. It maintains that “the market” delivers

benefits that could never be achieved by planning.

Student asks a question about the claim Student A makes about the link between a

competitive society and social inequality

Customised feedback and furthering of the knowledge construction

Original

Text

Student A:

Self-

Reflection

Student B:

Seeking

Tutor:

Evaluating

+

Requesting

z

1. Verbal discussion in real-time can be quite fleeting and difficult to record

via note-taking

Demands of multi-tasking with the potential for cognitive overload; more

daunting if the concepts involved are unfamiliar

2. Annotations as record

Students can check and re-check their understanding

Reply to annotations to seek clarification

Re-read annotations to check understanding

3. Students can take more time to input their annotations

Students can discuss with their friends first, do some reading up before typing

in an annotation

In UTW1001A, students could use the annotation tool in class – individually

within the group, or after discussion in a group – or outside of class

Enables student autonomy to decide how they want to learnLearn

ing t

hat

takes p

lace a

t any tim

e,

any p

lace

Benefits

z

Learn

ing t

hat

takes p

lace a

t any tim

e,

any p

lace

Student

Tutor

Student

z Developing knowledge by utilizing the original text and bringing in one’s current

knowledge

Anchoring t

he D

iscussio

n

Defining characteristic of neoliberalism: neoliberalism portrays the free market as a neutral

force, and that if we let the market operate naturally without government intervention

we will get a fairer society where people get what we deserve. But the reality is that in a

neoliberal economy we are not absolutely free, but still subject to the influence of market

forces. Corporations want to maximise their profit and as a result will create products

and employ factors of production that meets that end. This means that corporations

will not pay attention to the needs of those who work under them…

“The market” sounds like a natural system that might bear upon us equally, like gravity or

atmospheric pressure. But it is fraught with power relations. What “the market wants”

tends to mean what corporations and their bosses want.

nice points/explains fully but may be able to make it shorter by rephrasing

A good summary that captures the main idea of 'naturalness', and how this idea of what the

market wants is really what the economic elites want since they are best placed to operate

the market, e.g. since they have the capital to make the transactions that form part of the

market.

Original

Text

Student C:

Self-

Reflection

Student D: Support +

Alternative/Complementary

Proposal

Tutor:

Evaluating

Affective dimension; focusing also on language since

paraphrasing is an important skill to show understanding.

Self-reflection using threshold

concepts.

Tutor provides feedback and explanation that is anchored to the original text.

z

Colla

bora

tive L

earn

ing:

Expandin

g

the I

nput

thro

ugh D

iscussio

nNeoliberalism has become very ingrained into our society and lifestyle that we as thinking

humans are unable to identify it as a form of ideology. We have grown used to this

ideology till its part of our everyday life, even though this ideology is the product of a

deliberate effort to change society and consolidate wealth and power.

I don't think it started out as a deliberate effort to consolidate wealth and power. However,

that is what neoliberalism has become.

Student F's point is a good one. It has been pointed out that Hayek's goal was much

more grand - to find a type of absolute truth that organizes society

Are we not able to identify neoliberalism as an ideology bc [because] of how ingrained it is

or because it can take so many forms?

I think we probably need to think about how it's ability to take on so many forms has

enabled it to become so ingrained in daily life

So pervasive has neoliberalism become that we seldom even recognise it as an

ideology.Original Text

Student E:

Self-

Reflection

Student F:

Conflict/

Disagreement

Tutor:

Evaluating +

Sharing

Student G:

Alternative/

Complementary

Proposal

Tutor:

Evaluating

z

Outcomes

z

Concept

Maps:

Gro

upw

ork

(after

3 w

eeks o

f con

cep

t b

uild

ing

)

z Student Experience of Hypothes.isS

urv

ey R

esponses

The function itself or enabling us to annotate freely is wonderful. Easy to look back on my own

thoughts that I might easily forget.

It is very convenient to use and I can use real-time discussion with my friends and teachers using

the comment features in the Hypothes.is tool. This makes my learning more fruitful and effective.

I love that I can highlight the text. It helps me to remember the key ideas in the article.

The ability to add comments and reply to them, which provides an interactive platform to discuss

about the text. Allows me to also see what my classmates have written and to learn from them.

z

Application to Research Project Topic of Choice + Generating New Idea of ‘Abridged Meritocracy’

Sam

ple

fro

m F

inal A

ssig

nm

ent

Due to the prevalence of the leaderboard feature, a sense of competition is deeply

instilled in the player, as those who are further up in the leaderboard often get to enjoy

greater bonuses, both through actual game rewards as well as social recognition. This

differential treatment between the top and the bottom links back to the neoliberal

characteristic of hyper-competition, where players must fight aggressively to stay in their

position lest others take it from them. Hence, one would either have to spend a lot of time

and effort on the game, where you really work for your position ‘meritocratically’, or

otherwise pay and use the rule-bending premium currency to rise to the top of the

leaderboard. This is corroborated by my interviewee, who states that one would either

require an “insane amount of commitment” to the game to stay amongst the top,

otherwise it would be “not that possible without spending [a large sum of money on

microtransactions]”. Here, an abridged form of meritocracy is formed, where one’s

position in the game is originally thought to be self-responsibilised through commitment

and time, and yet now players can buy their way to the top using “cheap methods”. Thus,

it is evident that hyper-competition and an abridged meritocracy have intruded the

freemium game market and are clearly expressed in the game’s design.

z Facilitating collaboration, peer learning and active engagement in the construction of

knowledge

Conclu

sio

n

ICAP

Characteristics

Passive Active Constructive Interactive

Overt

Behaviours

Reading

the text

silently

individually

Highlighting the

text in

response to a

question/task

prompt

Typing in

annotations, e.g.

self-reflection that

goes beyond

summarizing and is

done in one’s own

words

Typing in annotations in

response to other annotations,

e.g. seeking,

alternative/complementary

proposal, support,

conflict/disagreement

Cognitive

Processes

Storing of

information

Integrating a prior schema

(Discussions about what

neoliberalism is from previous

lessons) with new information which

expands beyond the source text.

Involves both the content of the

source text and going beyond it.

Working in dialogue with other

learners and the tutor to go

beyond the source text – ‘co-

generating’

z Facilitating collaboration, peer learning and active engagement in the construction of

knowledge

Online SA Tools

Online SA tools like Hypothes.is, have the potential to leverage on

learner-centredness, knowledge-centredness, informal

assessment and community centredness (Mendenhall &

Johnson, 2010; Novak, Razzouk & Johnson, 2012),

Can help students from varied disciplinary backgrounds engage

with and understand the specific academic content (‘threshold

concepts’) needed in an IEM module.

No need to format the webpage for Google Docs; more immediacy

and authenticity as well

Conclu

sio

n

CAST (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved from

http://udlguidelines.cast.org.

Chi, M. T., Adams, J. , Bogusch, E. B., Bruchok, C. , Kang, S. , Lancaster, M. , Levy, R. , Li, N. , McEldoon,

K. L., Stump, G. S., Wylie, R. , Xu, D. & Yaghmourian, D. L. (2018). Translating the ICAP Theory of

Cognitive Engagement Into Practice. Cognitive Science, 42: 1777-1832. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12626.

Gao, F. (2013). ‘A case study of using a social annotation tool to support collaboratively learning’, The

Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 17, pp.76–83. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.11.002

Hypothes.is. (n.d.). https://web.hypothes.is/.

Kranzfelder, P., Bankers-Fulbright, J. L., Garc ́ıa-Ojeda, M. E., Melloy, M., Mohammed, S. & Warfa, A.-R.M.

(2019). The Classroom Discourse Observation Protocol (CDOP): A quantitative method for characterizing

teacher discourse moves in undergraduate STEM learning environments. PLoS ONE 14(7): e0219019.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219019

Marsh, D. (ed.) (2002). CLIL/EMILE the European Dimension. University of Jyväskylä.

Mendenhall, A. & Johnson, T. E. (2010). Fostering the Development of Critical Thinking Skills, and Reading

Comprehension of Undergraduates using a Web 2.0 Tool Coupled with a Learning System. Interactive

Learning Environments, 18(3), 263-276.

Meyer, J. H. F. & Land, R. (2006). Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge: An Introduction. In J.

H. F. Meyer and R. Land (Eds.), Overcoming Barriers to Student Understanding: Threshold Concepts and

Troublesome Knowledge (pp. 3-18). Abingdon and New York, NY: Routledge.

Novak, E., Razzouk, R. & Johnson, T. E. (2012). The Educational Use of Social Annotation Tools in Higher

Education: A Literature Review. Internet and Higher Education, 15, 39-49.

Refe

rences