EDIT4L ALT-C Thursday, 6th September 2007

Online toolkits for learning design. Should we bother?

Mark Childs University of WarwickGraham Lewis University of AberstwythPaul Riddy University of Southampton(Karen Fill University of Southampton)

ALT-C 2007 2Sept 6

EDIT4L - aims

Implement and evaluate existing learning design tools in the context of teaching staff development.Disseminate these tools more extensively.Explore and support their use in design for

learning.Evaluate their impact.

ALT-C 2007 3Sept 6

EDIT4L – the tools

DialogPlus toolkit (DPT)

Learning Activity Management System (LAMS)

ALT-C 2007 4Sept 6

DPT feedback

Disliked: educational language to complex interface too linear and non-intuitive difficult to re-find sub-phases eg tasks

Liked Structured approach to educational design – useful

reminder and for new teachers Outcomes / aims / tasks maps L&T library useful / too detailed

ALT-C 2007 5Sept 6

LAMS feedback

Disliked: Navigation options too linear / impoverished

educational model Non synchronous options for shared activities

Liked Ease of use of interface, and for developing activity

sequences Potential for sharing of activity sequences Applicability to sequential leaning and scaffolding

activities

ALT-C 2007 6Sept 6

Design cycle and scope of tools  Conception Analysis Programme

DesignSession design

Content Production Delivery Evaluation

 

DPT                

LAMS                

L.P.                

Phoebe                

Also: analyses of user groups against design cycle

(see evaluation report - live from October 1st)

ALT-C 2007 7Sept 6

Suggestions for new tool

User-configurable – so that the different types of users can be catered for

Progressive disclosure – so that new users aren’t confronted with a large range of options. The tool possesses a kernel onto which users can add layers.

Navigability – foregrounding the mental model that the tool uses

Just-in-time instructions and wizards – to allow appropriate learning steps for using the tool

Engagement – tools that encourage a community of practice

ALT-C 2007 8Sept 6

Issues with embedding

They can be seen as a reproach for incorrect practice, rather than an opportunity for support

Embedding them is usually made the responsibility of staff developers. The responsibility for seeing the tools embedded should be made that of senior management and the process integrated with QA and QE activities.

Tools aren’t seen to open up more opportunities for teachers, not be simply as more work, or limiting the range of what can be done.

Incorporating a learning design tool requires a cultural change regarding learning design to take place, particularly in HE.

ALT-C 2007 9Sept 6

Should we bother?

Are the current toolkits effective? Can we envisage a toolkit that would be

used? Can the barriers to use be overcome?

ALT-C 2007 10Sept 6

Contact

Paul Riddy p.j.riddy@soton.ac.uk Mark Childs m.childs@warwick.ac.uk Graham Lewis TBA

http://www.edit4l.soton.ac.uk:8081/