A framework of factors to assess and support innovative pedagogy in eLearning, the Swiss Virtual Campus case

1
A framework of factors to assess and support
innovative pedagogy in eLearning, the Swiss
Virtual Campus case
http//tecfa.unige.ch/proj/cvs/en/welcome.html
Pr. Jacques Viens, Ph.D.

• TECFA, Uni. de Genève

2
PLAN

• Context

• Major concepts

• Structure of factors

• Examples of factors by level

• A systemic framework

• Discussion

3
CONTEXT (overview)

• ICT Society Swiss Virtual Campus
• Action research 1 IntersTICES
• Results factors models
• Action research 2 GIRAFE
• Results research vs action/practice

4
CONTEXT

• Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC)
• a (societal) national response

Phase I 2000-2004
- 50 eLearning projects (3 y., 3 uni., prof.) -
28 in 2000, 22 in 2001 - Matched funding, app. 1M
Euro - 4 mandates (1 tech., then 2 ped, 1 inst.)
5
IntersTICES MANDATE

• Goals/Tasks

• To provide pedagogical support to the projects
• To make an inventory of the projects pedagogical
  practices, mainly the exploitation of the
  innovative and interactive potential of ICT
• To set the bases of an evaluation framework
  assessing the innovative nature of eLearning
  pedagogy, in collaboration with the national
  and international community.

6
CONTEXT  

• 3 GROUPS OF FACTORS AFFECTING ICT USES IN
  EDUCATION
• Teachers characteristics
• Age, experience, ICT abilities, pedagogical
  vision/values, attitudes towards change, self
  efficacy
• Technology specificities attributions
• What is done ? Which tools activities? Actors
  perceptions of ICT and related activities
  usefulness, advantages over non-ICT activities,
  level of difficulty and complexity
• Institutional factors
• Time, peers collabo/support, adm. support,
  converging vision of ICT, ICT training,
  availability and access to equip., technical
  support on time, topic and school programs,
  school level, socio-economic level

7
METHOD

• Recherche-action-formation
• Participative and collaborative
• 5 initial steps

• First contact meeting with each projet
• Interview current situation, needs analysis
  and follow up planning
• Specific support to the projects
• Animation of a virtual community of practice
• Collective face to face activities and workshops

8
OUR STRATEGY
 Action-instruction  research
Explicitation Elaboration

• Targeted competences
• Context resources contraints
• Pedagogical stance (actorsrole)
• Scenario - Content, activities, resources
  - Articulation presence/distance

Needs analysis and formative Evaluation of the
dispositive
Co-managed workshops
Discussion, sharing in a Community of practice
Theoretical practical references or tools for
the developement of a distance learning
dispositive
9
METHOD

• Data collection

• Notes from meetings of step 1-3
• Transcription of interviews (step 2)
• Egroup activities and emails
• Literature review

• Data analyses

• Qualitative
• Cycles of readings, linking, sense making
• Validation by triangulation

10
Major concepts

• eLearning a multidimensional concept a
  development process
• Innovation what? for who?
• Innovative pedagogy for students ?
• Evaluation and support a systemic approach

11
Major concepts eLearning
Teacher/tutor, learner, others
Scenario
Face to face activities
Online activities
Consultation Interaction Production Search Reflexi
on/think. Discussion Communication Practice,
Human resources
Profs, assistants, tutors, students, experts
Classroom laboratory
Home/Work activities
Teaching/learning platform
Internet acces, identification/registration person
al database, tools, etc
Documents, lessons, web site
Maintenance updating
12
Major concepts eLearning
Conception
Analyses
Production
Systematic development process
Implementation
Field tests
Actors Resources Material conditions Institutional
convention/constraints
Real world, conditions context
13
Major concepts innovation

• Spontaneous or systemic systematic process
  (units/phases and degrees/levels)Chins (1976)
• Units (Individual, Group, Institution, Culture)
• Levels (Substitution, Alteration, Perturbation,
  Restructuration, Value changes)

14
Major concepts innovation

• Added value by a change in practice/tools
• Innovation and added value for who ?
• Learners
• Teachers
• Developers
• Institution
• Society (industry)

15
Major concepts innovation
eLearning Added value
Require to make things explicit
Basic pedagogy principle Congruence Objectives
objects (contents)Processes, specific support
toolsProducts (evaluated, applied)
16
Major concepts innovation
eLearning Added value

• Access, but what do you provide access to ?
• Individualization, but what cost?
  And what about globalisation ?
• Feedback, yes but from who ? How rich ? What cost
  ?

17
Major concepts Innovative pedagogy
Added value 4 key dimensions
A continuum How do you integrate/support
(into objectives, activities, ressources,
evaluation)
1. Learners autonomy and deep involvementCBL,
hypertext, PBL, responsabilization (goals,
content, strategies) 2. Contextualised
activities (real world), projects Simulations,
microworlds, (context of action culture)
3. Collaboration, co-elaboration of
knowledgeSocial skills, production strategies
and objects of negociation 4. Deep learning, high
level cognitive skills/activitiesmetacognition,
reflexive/critical thinking, Cognitive tools
18
Major concepts Evaluation/support

• Beyond the learning kit ... (Stufflebeam)
• Context, inputs, processes, output (products).
• Context (Bronfenbrenner) (micro, meso, macro)
• Added value for the consumers (Scriven)
• Consider the changes in actors values (Stake)
• Economic/short term evaluation may be misleading
• Systemic (Viens)

19
A SYSTEMIC STRUCTURE OF FACTORS
- Societal aspects (Macro)- Institutional
aspects (Meso) - Learning environ./dispositive
(Micro) Technology (environment, interface,
tools) Pedagogy (scenario goals,
processes,...) Development process/strategies
- Human aspects (repre, abilities, att.,
practice) (Learners, teachers, tutors,
developpers, administratives, )
20
SOCIETAL ASPECTS (MACRO)
Examples

• Imposed condition of partners from at least 3
  universities often not collaborators as
  start, impedes the effectiveness
• Managing multi-uni projects is time consuming
  and complex, goals, interests, practice,
  programs, resources, management
• Multi-languages activities are high
  cost/time/energy for all
• 3 years is long to develop a course, but short
  for innovation 6 months/1 year to
  launch/establish the collaboration and a
• shared vision
• SVC expectations vs real life constraints for
  projects

21
INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS (MESO)
Examples

• Culture of eLearning to be developed and
  officially supported (vision, curriculum,
  evaluation, resources, recognition)
• Conditions differ (goals, programs, resources,
  involvement)
• Inter-institutions contracts
• Internal management rules/procedures not adapted

22
LEARNING ENVIRONMENT (MICRO)
Technology Examples

• Platform limits and constraints,
  inter-operability, standards (identification,
  versions, software, ) still to discover
• Interface (web pages) design has a low priority
  level
• Platform tools/design foster a traditional
  delivery approach
• Communication and knowledge construction tools
  are new

23
LEARNING ENVIRONMENT (MICRO)
Pedagogy Examples

• Too much content is targeted, in eLearning
  everything needs to be more explicit/planned/ad
  dressed, so what is essential ?
• Text-based conception inherited from traditional
  teaching/writing
• Goals not always clear, harmonised with
  activities/evaluation
• New roles students, tutors and teachers need
  guidelines and procedures support for active
  eLearning

24
LEARNING ENVIRONMENT (MICRO)
Development process examples

• Mostly intuitive, no systematic
  design/development experience
• Main energy is invested in production, very
  little analyses, design, evaluation,
  implementation concerns
• Evaluation and implementation issues are just
  being considered but should be at start
• Coordinators are overloaded, management and
  development (content, web pages, pedagogical
  models and procedures).

25
A MULTIDIMENSIONAL MODEL
Institutional multi... Universities, departments
Learner
Learner
Learner
Learner
Learner
Teacher
Context
Actors
Teacher
eLearning culture Representations/values Abilities
/resources Attitudes Practice
Teacher
Tutors et assistants
Conceptors/developers
Physical context classroom, labo, home
Society UNESCO
26
What ? Why ? When ? How ?
1
2
3
Objectives, competencies, activities, Actors
roles responsibilities, resources, evaluation of
impacts
Seven indicators/factors of innovative and
enriched pedagogical practice
1- Access to information and resources (time -
space) 2- Individualization, adaptation of
learning activities 3- Richer Feedback (access
individualization frequency quality) 4-
Autonomy, responsibilization learner
involvement 5- Cooperation, collaboration,
co-elaboration of knowledge 6- Situated
learning, reality anchored activities,
simulation, visualization 7- High-level
knowledge, critical thinking, reflexive
verbalization
Pedagogical spaces of integration
Explicit
Implicit
Absent
7 indicators/factors of innovative enriched
practice
27
Action-Instruction-Research
Our strategy ?
Explicitation Elaboration

• Targeted competences
• Context resources contraints
• Pedagogical stance (actorsrole)
• Scenario - Content, activities, resources
  - Articulation presence/distance

Needs analysis and formative Evaluation of the
dispositive
Co-managed workshops
Discussion, sharing in a Community of practice
Theoretical practical references or tools for
the developement of a distance learning
dispositive
28
THE END  

• Questions?
• jacques.viens_at_umontreal.ca