27.06.2013 Views

learning - Academic Conferences Limited

learning - Academic Conferences Limited

learning - Academic Conferences Limited

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Stella Lee et al.<br />

Figure 5: One of the key study skill – Note taking skill along with suggested tool to use<br />

5. Discussion<br />

The research reported here relates to the design of a quite significant implementation of an eLearning<br />

system in a pragmatic educational context based on constructive models of <strong>learning</strong>. The approach<br />

differs in several ways from other approaches we have used in the past. In the first place the<br />

modeling approach is intended to foster a constructive approach to <strong>learning</strong>. To this end two <strong>learning</strong><br />

theories have been employed in the design of the system. Modeling approaches we have used in the<br />

past have been to some extent instructive in that they have been used (Adisen & Barker, 2007;<br />

Adisen, Barker, & Britton, 2004; Barker, Jones, Britton, & Messer, 2002; Brusilovsky, 1998). In the<br />

authors’ opinion, eLearning 2.0 implies self-directed <strong>learning</strong> and a student taking personal<br />

responsibility for his or her <strong>learning</strong>. The question remains: how can a system based on a modeling<br />

approach foster constructive rather than instructive <strong>learning</strong>? The ways that student models have<br />

been used in the past to recommend or prescribe presentation can be seen as fostering instruction<br />

rather than construction of knowledge. Secondly in our approach the model we use relates directly to<br />

the tasks that learners are undertaking and their approaches to them, rather than to models of an<br />

individual learner. Our modeling approach does not attempt to model the characteristics or<br />

knowledge of a learner, but rather models the relationship between the task the learners are<br />

undertaking and the level of confidence, skill and general strategy they are using. The support and<br />

presentation strategy provided for learners is therefore not intended to deliver instruction differentially<br />

based on settings of a student model, but rather is intended to help the learner to construct his or her<br />

own <strong>learning</strong> path through the material in order to solve a problem or to learn new material related to<br />

a problem. The use of <strong>learning</strong> theory or cognitive style was previously used in our research to<br />

classify or categorize learners(Barker et al., 2002). In the current approach we have avoided this<br />

method and have instead modeled the tasks and the approaches to solving them that best fits the<br />

needs of an individual learner. In the next stage of the research a full-scale evaluation of the initiative<br />

is currently underway with learners at an online university in Canada. It is hoped to gain an<br />

understanding of how this approach may be of benefit to learners.<br />

References<br />

Adisen, A., & Barker, T. (2007). Supporting the diversity of the ELearning 2.0 learners: The development of a<br />

psychological student model. Paper presented at the E-Learn 2007 Conference, Quebec City, Canada.<br />

Adisen, A., Barker, T., & Britton, C. (2004). Investigating the potential of mental models in adaptive user<br />

modelling. Paper presented at the Proceedings of HCI 2004: Design for Life, Leeds Metropolitan University,<br />

Leeds, UK.<br />

Azevedo, R. (2005). Using Hypermedia as a Metacognitive Tool for Enhancing Student Learning? The Role of<br />

Self-Regulated Learning. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 199-209.<br />

397

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!