Johanna Bluemink 5th of April, 2012 Pedagogical models and scripting CSCL.

Esitys aiheesta: "Johanna Bluemink 5th of April, 2012 Pedagogical models and scripting CSCL."— Esityksen transkriptio:

1 Johanna Bluemink 5th of April, 2012 Pedagogical models and scripting CSCL

2 Is this a problem?

3 There is this talk about learning online; anywhere, anytime, anything… ”Get your Master’s online” This talk is connected to technology-mediated education, but in reality, is far from the challenges faced in the real learning situations (Järvenoja & Järvelä, 2004) The ”promise” of online education

4  One might easily think that technology as such is ready for use and that the technology also determines the ways people use it  Despite the rapid development of technology and internet, people have not changed Järvelä, S. & Häkkinen, P. (2002).

5 Pedagogical scripting To achieve good quality collaborative activity, it is possible to pre-design pedagogical scripts to guide the activities The goal of scripting is to promote those type of interactions that are found effective for learning ”Scaffolding” effort taken before hand, whereas in tutoring it is taken in the action

6 Pedagogical models Progressive inquiry (Hakkarainen, Lonka & Lipponen, 1999; Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1994) Jigsaw Classroom Problem-based learning (Walton & Matthews, 1989) Reciprocal teaching (Palincsar & Brown, 1984)

7 Progressive inquiry Hakkarainen, Lonka, Lipponen, 2001:Tutkiva Oppiminen Hakkarainen, Lonka, Lipponen, 2001 Progressive Inquiry

8 Jigsaw http://www.jigsaw.org/

9 Problem-based learning in Sydney Dental Hospital

10 The Six core characteristics of problem based learning: Student-centered approach, “we learn” learning occurs in small groups teachers act as facilitators or guides (referred to as tutors) a problem forms the basis for organized focus and stimulus for learning problems stimulate the development and use of problem solving skills new knowledge is obtained through means of self- directed learning (As defined in wikipedia.org)

11 www.lemill.net Web-resource and community for education & learning Search, share materials, methods, links Several language options

12 The risks of over-scripting Too much is too much – endangers the natural social interaction Might limit the options too much Might lead to cognitive overload (remembering all the phases of the activity etc.) The task does not feel challenging enough anymore

13 Tulevaisuuden suuntia Ei jäljitellä kasvokkaistilanteita vaan haetaan lisäarvoa, CSCL voi olla enemmän kuin kasvokkain työskentely! Pedagogiset skriptit Pelit tietoisuustyökaluina Blogit & wikit – social web

14 Multiplayer games as designed experiences Games can be looked as designed experiences… …or possibility spaces, which generate meaning and are interactive by their nature Creating a game means “Designing a structure that will play out in complex and unpredictable ways”

15 Virtual Team Game: Participants’ perspective – five team tasks to be solved Placeholders for footer informationPage15 Barrels: Psychological safety The end: Completing tasks with success Building a flying ship: Project planning, execution of plan Dogs and fences: Shared understanding, distributed team work Smoke signals: Joint problem solving, coordination of activities Burner oil: Sharing existing knowledge, negotiation

16 References Bluemink, J., & Järvelä,S. (2004). Face-to-Face Encounters as Contextual Support for Web-based Discussions in a Teacher Education Course. Internet and Higher Education, 7 (3), 199-215. Bluemink, J., Hämäläinen, R., Manninen, T., & Järvelä, S. (2009). Group-level analysis on multiplayer-game collaboration: How do the individuals shape the group interaction? Accepted for publication to the Journal of Interactive Learning Environments. Häkkinen, P. http://tievie.oulu.fi/verkkopedagogiikka/luku_7/yhteisollinen_oppiminen.htmhttp://tievie.oulu.fi/verkkopedagogiikka/luku_7/yhteisollinen_oppiminen.htm Järvelä, S. & Häkkinen, P. (2002). Web-based Cases in Teaching and Learning - the Quality of Discussions and a Stage of Perspective Taking in Asynchrounous Communication. Interactive Learning Environments, 10(1), 1-22. Järvelä, S. http://tievie.oulu.fi/verkkopedagogiikka/luku_7/verkkovuorovaikutus.htmhttp://tievie.oulu.fi/verkkopedagogiikka/luku_7/verkkovuorovaikutus.htm Järvenoja, H. & Järvelä, S. (2004). How the students explain their social, emotional and motivational experiences during their learning processes. Accepted for publication. Learning and Instruction. Leinonen, P., & Bluemink, J. (2008). The Distributed team members' explanations of the knowledge they assume to be shared. Journal of Workplace Learning 20 (1). Mäkitalo, K., Häkkinen, P., Järvelä, S. & Leinonen, P. (2002). The mechanisms of common ground in the web-based interaction. The Internet and Higher Education, 5(3), 247-265. Teknologian mahdollisuudet ymmärtävän oppimisen tukena (2008). Toimittaneet Tiina Luokkanen, Piia Näykki, Niina Impiö & Essi Vuopala. Oulun yliopiston opetuksen kehittämisyksikön julkaisuja. Dialogeja 9. University of Oulu. http://www.oulu.fi/opetkeh/julkaisu/dialogeja/teknologian_mahdollisuudet_ymmartavan_oppimisen_tuke na.pdf http://www.oulu.fi/opetkeh/julkaisu/dialogeja/teknologian_mahdollisuudet_ymmartavan_oppimisen_tuke na.pdf Oppimisen teoria ja teknologian opetuskäyttö (2006). Sanna Järvelä, Päivi Häkkinen, Erno Lehtinen (toim.). Helsinki : WSOY.