Phoebe: A Pedagogic Planner to Promote Innovative Practice in Design for Learning

1
Phoebe A Pedagogic Planner to Promote Innovative
Practice in Design for Learning 

• Marion Manton
• TALL, University of Oxford

2
Overview

• Pedagogic planning tools
• What do we do when we plan?
• The design challenge
• Phoebe design rationale and quick tour
• Future developments
• Phase 2 prototypes
• Issues

3
Technology as a driver for (re-)planning

• E-learning is often talked about as a trojan
  mouse, which teachers let into their practice
  without realizing that it will require them to
  rethink not just how they use particular hardware
  or software, but all of what they do. (Sharpe
  Oliver, 2007, p. 49)
• It fundamentally made me think about what I
  actually do in the class. The VLE really made
  me think about how am I going to project what it
  is that I give to a lesson when Im face to face
  on this screen? Usually I dont have to plan
  my lessons, I just go in and do it What it
  brought me back to was the actual lesson plan,
  you know, like when you first started off it
  was like that all over again. (School teacher)

4
Tools to mediate the design process

• I use pen and paper to collect ideas, Post-its
  to sort main headings. I like to lecture from a
  hand-written outline.
• 1. Pen and paper broad conceptual overview,
  key learning activities mapped as a
  storyboard/concept map. 2. Formalise this map in
  Word or PowerPoint. 3. Detailed matrix of
  learning outcomes, activities and assessment in
  Excel for detailed analysis etc.
• For me it is generally a case of getting the
  basic structure down and some notes into a
  word-processor, which I then usually replicate as
  a structure in the VLE. My classes tend to be
  based around PowerPoint slides with break-out
  activities so I mainly use PPT and scribble in
  the notes facility. For out of class online
  activities I generally sequence (i.e. list!)
  Web sites or activities in the VLE and then
  construct some prose around these to give the
  students some direction (e.g. step 1 go to this
  site, step 2 post up your comments etc.).

5
The range of approaches

• The starting point would be the assessment
  criteria/expected learning outcomes. This would
  be balanced by the students needs and level of
  learning. I would also take into account the type
  of students The environment can affect what
  can be done in a session e.g. availability of
  breakout rooms, space for group work etc. Time of
  day can be important. Available resources
  would also be considered.
• I often go out for a run to clear my head to let
  the creative juices start to flow. depending
  on what course it is (some are looser than
  others), I usually start by thinking about the
  knowledge or skills learners need, whilst keeping
  a strong eye on the assessment. This then
  develops into aims and outcomes. I liken the
  process to painting a picture you dont start at
  one particular point but move from one part to
  another. Each development affects the other
  parts.

6
Drafts and completed plans

7
The design challenge

• Maybe its going to be difficult to develop a
  single software tool kit that suits everybodys
  preferences for planning learning (paper based,
  software or a mixture of both!) and maybe it
  could be useful to develop flexible software
  tools that support teachers through the process
  and stages of designing for learning (Teacher
  in HE)

8
Phoebe design philosophy

• Principles
• Propagate effective practice to a wide audience
• Allow option to use familiar planning tools
• Rationale
• Learning Design tools and LAMS in limited use
  output XML
• Successful IT projects build on the way users
  work, dont force them to adapt

9
The Phoebe prototype

• Phase 1 proof-of-concept tool
• Open source, built on wiki technology
• Supports planning for individual learning
  sessions made up of learning activities
• Functions
• Reference tool guidance, advice and examples
• Planning a learning session
• http//phoebe-app.conted.ox.ac.uk

10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)
20
(No Transcript)
21
(No Transcript)
22
Phoebe Evaluation of Phase1 prototype

• Very positive response from practitioners to
  overall vision
• Saw applicability in context of initial teacher
  training and staff development programmes
• Not sure if it would work as a self-teaching aid
  for lone practitioners who wish to explore D4L.
  
• The guidance and examples appear to meet
  practitioners needs
• In its present form it functions better as a
  resource with a note-taking facility than as a
  usable and useful tool for creating lesson plans
• There is considerable interest in the potential
  of Phoebe as a customisable community-owned tool

23
Future directions Phoebe phase2

• Make Phoebe more usable as a planning tool
• Tool needs a place to see and work on a learning
  design as a whole
• Considerable effort is still needed to develop
  the content
• Test Phoebe in teacher-training and
  staff-development contexts
• Explore Phoebe as a community-owned tool
• Ensure relevance to users through customisation
• A way to tackle long-term sustainability
• http//phoebe-app2.conted.ox.ac.uk/design_show.php

24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
Issues going forward

• Formal versus informal
• Total control to the individual or institutional
  management?
• Managing the content in the future
• Centrally managed version?
• Institutional versions?
• Wikipedia style?

28
Does Phoebe work?

• Evaluations in the Autumn
• Volunteers welcome

29
Thank you

• Phoebe project wiki
• http//phoebe-project.conted.ox.ac.uk
• Phoebe Phase 1 prototype
• http//phoebe-app.conted.ox.ac.uk
• Contact me
• marion.manton_at_conted.ox.ac.uk