Flexible pedagogies for disruptive technologies

Dr Debra HovenSchool of Cultural and Language Studies in Education

Queensland University of Technologyd.hoven@qut.edu.au

CALICO Symposium, Hawaii 2006Riding the wave

Riding the wave …

of disruptive technologies …

• What are disruptive technologies & how did they get this name? (Christensen vs Dvorak – 2004)

“… defined as a low-performance, less expensive technology that enters a heated-up scene where the established technology is outpacing people’s ability to adapt to it. The new technology gains a foothold, continues to improve, and then bumps the older, once-better technology into oblivion.”

cf … educational contexts)

• Social/human affordances and uses of new technologies …

Technology that disrupts the traditional rules/norms of classes e.g.Mobile phonesIMChat rooms

• How flexible can we be?• What can we be flexible about?

10 insights from distance language teaching (Henrichsen, 2001)

1. Different ICT options each have their own strengths (& weaknesses)

2. Sophisticated ICT not necessarily better esp. in isolated areas/developing countries

3. Regardless of technology, solid instructional design & effective teaching methods are crucial

4. DE involves teaching & learning in new/ modified roles

5. Teachers work as members of instructional/ technical team

10 insights from distance teaching (Henrichsen, 2001)

cont’d …6. Importance & difficulty of creating &

maintaining active, interactive learning

7. Importance of building a sense of community & overcoming isolation

8. Design flexibility is crucial9. Evaluating students and program

success is challenging10.Reducing attrition also a challenge

Critical features in online/flexible language

teaching & learning• Communication (1-1, 1-many)• Social interaction• Meaningful exchange of information• Modelling of, & appropriating

good/appropriate language• Getting and remaining on-task• Sense of community• … and appreciation of learners’ IDs

& preferences

Evolving Pedagogical Approach to a conception

that is:• Intentional• Flexible• Active• Contextualised/Situated• Experiential• Learner-shaped

Based on an emerging meld of:

• Constructivism (cognitive & mediated)• Sociocultural approaches (socially

constructed in context)• Task-based approaches• Ecological approaches (affordances)• Problem-solving approaches• Collaborative learning approaches• CSCL/WMCL

Finding the features of a pedagogy to maximise

opportunities offered by (continuously evolving and

emerging) communications

technologies

Which way to fly?

Learning environments & changing roles

• Learners (especially younger ones) are as comfortable if not more so than teachers with the newer (communications) technologies (Felix, 2001)

• learners who communicate more frequently also use a wider range of media (Haythornthwaite,1999)

• Learners prefer 1-1 over 1-many CMC interactions (Söntgens,1999)

Learning environments & changing roles 2

• Social relationships are necessary before and in order for information sharing to take place (Haythornthwaite, 1999; Söntgens,1999; Appel & Gilabert, 2002)

• After some familiarity and practice within an audio-enhanced CMC environment, learners appreciate the opportunity for real-time discussion of written and e-mail communication tasks (Kötter et al. 1999)

Modes of flexibility – a continuum

• Teacher/institution-defined course & materials– Hybrid of on-line & hard copy– Hybrid of f2f & on-line– Fully on-line

• Teacher/institution-defined tasks based on range of teacher/institution-defined online resources

• Semi (guided)-exploratory – using on-line materials with teacher/institution-defined limitations or instructions & criteria

Modes of flexibility – a continuum 2

• Collaborative & self- /group-managed– Under guidance of a teacher– Learner-teacher developed curriculum– Collectively constructed tasks– Collectively constructed evaluation– Collectively agreed deadlines

• Exploratory/autonomous/learner-shaped– With or without teacher guidance– With or without formal enrolment

For language learning

• Introducing the human element …• Audio/video technologies now

provide learners with opportunity to practise, interact, achieve a sense of community while

• Providing additional channels of communicating and

• Working collaboratively with learners in other times and locations

And the social element:

• Research shows that learners: – use specific technologies for specific

purposes– that learners resist or become

confused by register cross-over (e.g. social to educational contexts/purposes)

– & use whatever means they are comfortable with to communicate

Some models …Kanuka & Anderson (1999)

Radical pedagogy

Blythe (2001) User-centred design paradigm

Maor (2004) Pedagogy-technology bridge – pushing the comfort zone

Anderson (2005) Learning-centred design

Farmer (2005) Reflective, individualized new knowledge environments

Mellow (2005)Cochrane (2005)

mLearning for digital natives

Complemented by …

Larsen-Freeman (1997)

Chaos/Complexity Science & SLA

Kirschbaum (2002)

Complex Systems- self-organization- non-linearity- order/chaos

dynamic- emergent properties

The forest …

& the trees

& something

else …

The course• Context

– MEd: 2-years teaching experience– Balance of local & international students– Elective– 8 students + 2 visiting scholars (6 countries)

• Reasons for change– Pedagogic

• Content• Skills• Processes• Reflection

– Pragmatic

• Constraints

Course structure - blended

Physical Pedagogical Assessment

• 2 all-day workshops (1st live, SCMC tutorial)• 1 hr drop-in sessions weekly (f2f, IM or chat)• 1 additional optional w’shp (f2f or virtual)

• free-form • learner-shaped• responsive• only constraint: assessment items by end of semester

Task 1: Blog, wiki, chat, e-portfolio, discussion forum COMMUNICATIONTask 2: WebquestTask 3: create online module of tasks

Class Wikihttp://collaborate.ci.qut.edu.au/techllwiki/

index.php/Main_Page Class member blogshttp://LifeNtheUniverse.blogspot.com http://sascha-blog.blogspot.com/ http://yuhsu.blogspot.com/ http://kazucorner.blogspot.com/ http://owenlangdale.blogspot.com/ http://robeebajar.blogspot.com/ http://hncyliyu.blogspot.com http://nontravelblog.blogspot.com/

The study• Pre-course questionnaire:

– Biographical information– Computer experience– Computer competence– Computer skills– Computer confidence– Learning styles– Learning strategies– Course expectations

The studyPre-course Qre-Biographical info-Computer skills-Computer competence-Computer confidence-Learning styles-Learning strategies

Focus groupsProblem-basedScenariosSmall-groupVideoedTranscribed

Student artifactsBlogsWiki pagesWebquestsDiscussion forumsInstructional CALL projectsChat room logs

Pre-course questionnaire 1• All students had learnt at least one

other L2• 75% (6) rated themselves as

average overall computer competence: 25% (2) rated themselves as above average

• 1 had used blogs before• None had used computers to create

their own webpages• None had used computers to create

their own web-based lessons

Pre-course questionnaire 2• All acknowledged average to high

confidence in: – most common computer applications

and skills– Using Help functions– Using email– Sending attachments– Surfing the Internet

Pre-course questionnaire 3• All (but 1) acknowledged no to average

confidence in:– Designing webpages– Creating a webpage– Recording sound on computer

Pre-course questionnaire 4• All acknowledged no to average

confidence in:

– Recording & editing video– Adding sound or video to webpages– Creating on-line learning activities

Comments about using computers to help learn a

language:• Quite interesting: audio & visual possibilities• No experience, excellent way for learners to

control their own learning – don’t know much• Quite comfortable• Excited – but how to avoid the glitches??• Good for individual preparation prior to

immersion• Good for private study but prefer f2f• Requires autonomy which doesn’t suit my

learning style• Don’t feel comfortable using blogs, discussion

forums etc – too permanent

Overall impressions• Saw computers mainly as

instructional CALL• Wary of CMC• Wary of web presence• Learning style data not analysed

yet, but half claimed to:– Be not good autonomous learners– Be not good in isolated environments– Need f2f contact for learning

Focus group questions• Problem-based scenarios• Discussion/advice questions

– What suggestions can you give this student?– What do you see as being this student’s

problems in this unit?– What can they do now to complete this unit?– How would suggest they tackled things

differently if they could start again?– If you could have given this student some advice

before they enrolled in this unit, what would you say?

Focus groups- friendly, quiet young man

- taught in a couple of Asian countries - good at English

- worries that his proficiency not good enough to get the job he wants

-uses his mobile phone to send text messages and make calls

-keeps in touch with his family back home using chat and his webcam

- enrolled in 618 because he felt comfortable using the technology and that good university jobs require technology experience

-having trouble finishing his 618 assignments

- not sure how to adapt the technology to teaching purposes

Scenario 1: Han

Focus groups- enthusiastic man in his late-20s

-taught in a few different countries

-wants to get high-paying job in education

-feels confident he has the teaching experience

-realises communication and job-seeking technology can also probably be used to teach

-wants his piece of paper

-taking a full workload

-2 part-time jobs to pay for fees and living expenses

-started out well and feels confident

-slipping behind though “helping out” others

Scenario 2: Josh

Focus groups- young woman from traditional educational background

-came straight from an 18-month job in a private English school where she taught discrete-skill classes using a set textbook and materials

-never participated in planning or organising classes

-enrolled in this program to help her get promotional positions

-having trouble working out what to do and is falling behind

-worried that she is running out of time to learn the skills and even to get the work done

-other subjects are very demanding and have strict deadlines

Scenario 3: Shinta

Focus groups-quite a bit older than many of the other participants

-taught mainly in poorly resourced migrant education programs in Australia

-taught in a couple of Asian countries

-some broad experiences of different cultures and teaching conditions

-about time she tackled this “technology thing” to use the sorts of tools that her children and some of her students are quite familiar with

-earlier in the semester advised younger students about time management and planning

-Now struggling with technical skills

-panics and loses confidence

Scenario 4: Jeni

Focus group directions• Confidence through doing• Need prior preparation with computing

skills• Need more structure & deadlines• Take advantage of peer mentoring

opportunities (communities of practice)• Take advantage of multiple opportunities

for mutual support (affordances)• Need constant practice to improve:

– Computing skills– Study skills– Time-management skills– Prioritising tasks

Teachers Learners

Soft resources

Physical resources

Networks

Communication

External Environment

Instructional CALL

Exploration Collaboration

Flexible pedagogies for disruptive technologies

Dr Debra HovenSchool of Cultural and Language Studies in Education

Queensland University of Technologyd.hoven@qut.edu.au

CALICO Symposium, Hawaii 2006