Learning Technology
publication of
IEEE Computer Society
Learning Technology Task Force (LTTF)
|
|
Learning Technologypublication ofIEEE Computer Society
|
|
| Volume 4 Issue 1 Editorial board |
ISSN 1438-0625 Subscription Advertising in the newsletter |
January 2002 Author guidelines |
Welcome to the January 2002 issue of Learning Technology.
The call for submission is finally out for IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2002), September 9-12, 2002, Kazan, Russia. The website of the event is http://lttf.ieee.org/icalt2002/. The call for participation is available in this newsletter below. This year, our IEEE Learning Technology Task Force is sponsoring two other events: IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE 2002), August 29-30, 2002, Växjö, Sweden, and IEEE International Workshop on Knowledge Media Networking (KMN'02), July 10-12, 2002, Kyoto, Japan.
You are also welcome to complete the FREE MEMBERSHIP FORM for Learning Technology Task Force. Please complete the form at: http://lttf.ieee.org/join.htm.
Besides, if you are involved in research and/or implementation of any aspect of advanced learning technologies, I invite you to contribute your own work in progress, project reports, case studies, and events announcements in this newsletter. For more details, please refer author guidelines at http://lttf.ieee.org/learn_tech/authors.html.
| Kinshuk Editor, Learning Technology Newsletter kinshuk@massey.ac.nz |
Sponsored by
Conference theme
"ADVANCED LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES: MEDIA AND THE CULTURE OF LEARNING"
ICALT-2002 invites submissions with a good theoretical base or formalism and vital inspiration that present new, yet unpublished, solid achievements based on experimental and/or theoretical evidences that come to answer concretely one or more of the questions above or can point to possible answers. Survey papers are also accepted, if they are well documented, make a contribution to the field, and reveal new aspects and perspectives, as well as future directions. This year ICALT will offer in particular a platform for those who bring additional methods, tools and criteria for successful media development. Traditionally, the evolution of media for learning was based both upon theoretical and artistic grounds. We now gradually see intermediate foundations between these two (often irreconcilable) godfathers.
The first influx that helps us in this reunion is that learners themselves become active players in the way media manifest during the moments of ultimate learning. The second is the stepwise acceptance of learning practices that rely upon aesthetic, emotional and social factors. New (virtual) learning communities arise on the WWW with the goal to promote one's courage to change himself as a learner. Thirdly; many successful learning tools were initially not aimed at learning: Simulations programs, expert systems, agents, virtual reality and all WWW-based communication tools.
It seems that learning is a many-facetted process that benefits from new tools and interaction games all the time. The binding factor between learning and media development is the cultural heritage to assimilate new genres, new fashions and new etiquettes in our way to express meanings and promote mutual tolerance. Here we have the responsibility to make learners conscious of their identity and their responsibility to help others to learn as well.
We would like to invite you to bring in papers, based upon your experience, intuition and beliefs that are worth to be discussed from a scientific point of view. The more concrete you express your message in terms of media and new technologies, the more welcome you are.
Topics of Interest
The focus of the conference is on the design and development issues of advanced learning technologies. The topics of interest for the conference include but are not limited to:
The conference will focus on where the research in advance learning technology is heading and what are the implementation challenges in the real-world situations.
Submissions
Submissions are invited in following categories:
- Papers
- Panels
- Tutorials
- Workshops
Details of submission procedure are available at:
http://lttf.ieee.org/icalt2002/
Sponsored by
The IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE 2002) will bring together researchers, academics and industry practitioners who are involved or interested in the design and development of Wireless and Mobile Learning Technologies. Understanding of the challenges faced in providing technology tools to support the learning process and ease the creation of instruction material using mobile technologies will help building a direction for further research and implementation work.
It is expected that the workshop will promote a very intensive interaction among those attending it, giving ample time to discuss papers. Each full paper will have a 30-minutes slot for presentation and discussion. Short papers and work in progress will have 20 minutes. In both cases, a moderator will present his/her view of the paper to initiate the discussion.
The Workshop Proceedings will include contributions accepted by the International Program Committee, and will be published by IEEE Computer Society Press.
Topics of Interest
The topics of interest related to the conference theme include but are not limited to:
Program Co-Chairs
Program Committee
Submissions
Submissions are invited in following categories:
- Full Papers (8 pages)
- Short Papers / "work in progress" (4 pages)
- Interactive Posters (2 page descriptions)
Important dates
Submission Guidelines
Authors are encouraged to submit papers according to the different
categories as described above. All papers will have an extra cover page. Over-length
papers may be rejected without review. While preparing manuscripts, the authors
are required to follow IEEE Computer Society Press guidelines, which are available
at:
http://www.computer.org/cspress/instruct.htm
All papers should be submitted electronically. PDF and Word formats are preferred (optionally zipped), but other formats may also be accepted at the discretion of the Program Chairs. If you have any query for submission, please contact the Program Chairs.
The cover page of the paper should contain following information:
- Title of the paper
- Author names with affiliation, postal and email addresses, phone and fax numbers
- Name and email of contact author
- Abstract of no more than 200 words
The papers should be submitted electronically to the following
e-mail address:
wmte2002@msi.vxu.se
For further information and more details about the workshop are available at
the conference website:
http://lttf.ieee.org/wmte2002/
Sponsored by
Post-conference Proceedings by
Deadlines
Topics of interests
Co-Chairs
Program Chair
Submissions
Papers up to six pages (including figures, tables and references) can be electronically submitted as PDF or PostScript files to kmn02@khn.crl.go.jp.
Position papers of two to three pages in length can also be submitted. Papers
should be formatted according to IEEE Computer Society guidelines available
at:
http://www.computer.org/cspress/instruct.htm.
All submisson should include a title, the name and affiliation of each author, an abstract of up to 150 words and no more than eight keywords. Authors are also required to provide contact addresses, if different from the submitting electronic address.
All submissions will be peer reviewed. Papers should be electronically submitted to kmn02@khn.crl.go.jp.
Further details are available at:
http://lttf.ieee.org/kmn2002/
Client
McKenzie Institute International, founded by Robin McKenzie, certifies individuals in diagnosis and therapy of spinal pain. The McKenzie Institute USA is located in Syracuse, NY and is the first official branch of this not-for-profit organization.
The Challenge
The McKenzie Institute USA wanted to increase the opportunities and enrollment in their advanced degree certificate program. Students who had completed the first certificate were not enrolling in the advanced degree because of travel costs, lack of incentive to enroll and/or not enough hands-on experience to enroll in the advanced certificate.
The Solution
Syrtis, a Syracuse-based instructional technology firm, has developed an online learning environment by which clinicians can receive diagnosis experience. The web-based training consists of 12 case studies and can be accessed from any computer after the clinicians have enrolled. The case studies provide the clinicians with real life experience through a series of scenarios and probing questions. A combination of stimulating interactions on the web site and skillful programming of the databases enable this online learning environment to become a useful tool for developing critical thinking and practical hands-on experience for the clinicians.
At the beginning of the Lower Back Pain case study, clinicians are given a brief introduction by a physician and some history and physical information on the patient. This patient information is provided in a separate assessment, which displays in a separate window. The assessment form is identical to the form clinicians use in their practice. The case study continues as if the clinician were actually interviewing a patient and identifying the problem, and determining the correct treatment. The value of this strategy is that it allows the clinician to work through the diagnosis without constraint.
The program acts much the same way a choose-your-own-ending book would read. Clinicians make selections from the multiple-choice answers or questions based on their diagnosis. Immediate feedback is given and the clinician may either advance to the next segment of the case or revise their diagnosis. The diagnosis is correct and the next segment begins. If the diagnosis is incorrect, the clinician must return to the previous segment and make revise their diagnosis.
The clinician may repeat the case study as many times as they like, but there are a set number of five acceptable answers. Only one answer is truly the correct answer. Each time the clinician answers a piece of the diagnosis correctly, the assessment form displays in the information. This shows the clinicians how to use the diagnosis forms correctly.
One of the unique aspects of this training is the layering of information within the database. This allows the clinician to make their own assumptions about the patient, as they would in an office setting, but develop critical thinking by probing their reasoning for making such decisions. Syrtis designers and developers accomplished this by mapping four different types of questions to certain pages within the course. A template was created from these questions, so more question types can be added as needed. All information is housed on a Macromedia Cold Fusion server that generates the questions and responds to the clinicians' input.
The case study is interactive with audio and video features. The lesson combines the use of Macromedia Flash with audio to allow the user to see different views of a patient with spinal pain. This allowed Syrtis developers to create a visual experience with minimal download time. Because of time constraints on this project, the design and development teams were limited in the amount of interaction they could incorporate into the courses. The first case study was completed in two weeks.
The tools created for this project can be re-used in other facets of education for The McKenzie Institute, such as, web communities for clinicians, a case-of-the-month, and the addition of other case studies for clinicians at varying levels of expertise. The online training can be used by instructors at all levels of involvement, from distance learning to incorporating the case studies into classroom lectures.
Results
Currently, 12 case studies are being created and tested for future use. The first phase of course development has been completed and Syrtis is now working with content experts to refine the dynamics of the case studies. The actual cases will be presented at the McKenzie North American Conference in Tuscon, AZ, August 9 - 11, 2002. For more information on Syrtis, contact, Frank Caliva at FSCaliva@us.syr.edu or 315.443.2804. Visit our website at www.syrtis.com.
|
Amy Archambault |
Scope and Objectives of the IMS Question & Test Interoperability Specification
The IMS Question & Test Interoperability (QTI) specification describes
a basic structure - and its mapping in XML format - for the representation of
question (item) and test (assessment) data and their corresponding results reports,
targeted towards data exchange between Learning Management Systems (LMS), as
stated in (Shepherd et al, 2001). The specification, currently in its 1.2 draft
version, is comprised by a series of documents, extended from the initial 1.1
version (Smythe & Shepherd, 2001) that established the core information
model for questionnaires, called ASI (Assessment, Section and Item). According
to the specification, an 'item' contains a question, layout rendering information
and response processing information among other data. 'Sections' are a grouping
mechanism for items inside 'assessments'.
In the process of analyzing QTI specifications to initiate the development effort
of an IMS-compliant Assessment Engine, we have discovered a number of issues
about the QTI specification that either fall out of its scope, or are not explicitly
supported in its information model. In the former category, the most important
area is that of using questionnaires for usability, functionality or teaching
evaluation; the latter category includes the support for psychometric characterization
of items. Although the QTI spec is currently an evolving set of documents, and
provides some extensions mechanisms to accommodate variations, we feel that
these issues (and possibly others) are worth being considered for inclusion
as supplementary extensions. In what follows, we briefly describe the just proposed
extensions along with their rationale.
Extensions Needed for Item Banking
The construction, sharing and exploitation of large item banks in virtual
learning environments are requirements explicitly cited as objectives by the
IMS QTI Working Group in developing the QTI specifications (Shepherd et al,
2001). Nonetheless, the QTI information model lacks an explicit representation
for important information about item characteristics that is necessary to implement
reliable item banks. This information is related to Item Response Theory (IRT).
Classical testing and IRT
Classical testing methods and measure procedures have some well-known shortcomings
(Hambleton, 1991). One of the most important is that examinee characteristics
and test characteristics cannot be separated. Aspects like this make difficult
several operations on questionnaires like the construction of tests for examinee
populations that are dissimilar to the population of examinees with which the
indices were obtained, the comparison of examinees who take different test,
or the comparison of items whose characteristics are obtained using different
groups of examinees. Alternative test theories, like IRT, enable solutions to
disadvantages like the previous cited ones.
Item Characteristics in IRT
IRT requires that some information about an item's characteristics is made
available, usually in the form of an Item Characteristic Curve (ICC). ICC is
also the basis for adaptive testing, - see (Weiss, 1997) - that tailors the
item selection of tests to the user. The construction of adaptive tests is made
conditional to the existence of suitable item banks, which contain items that
are considered as independent entities unrelated to a concrete test or assessment
- for example, a recent application is described in (Gouli, 2001) .
In order to provide support for item interchange between banks to construct
new assessments, the information model of the QTI ASI specification should include
ICC information. Usually, the curve is described by a logistic model equation.
For example, a two-parameters logistic model applied to dichotomous item response
data is given by the equation:
where Pi(q) is the probability that a randomly chosen examinee with ability
q answers the item correctly, bi is the difficulty of item i, a is the discrimination
parameter and D is the scaling factor (it has been proven that 1.7 is an appropriate
value).
Embedding ICC Information in QTI data
QTI XML bindings can be extended to support the above described item information. As an example, the following XML fragment shows a simple QTI item description with added ICC information (in bold type face):
| <item ident="IMS_V01_I_BasicExample001a"> <itemmetadata> <irt:icc type="TwoParameterLogistic"> <irt:difficulty> 1.2 <irt:difficulty/> <irt:discrimination> 1.5 <irt:discrimination/> </irt:icc> </itemmetadata> <presentation label="BasicExample001a"> <flow> <material> <mattext>Paris is the Capital of France ?</mattext> </material> ... </presentation> ... </item> |
As ICCs are defined as specific functions, the type of functions can be codified
as attribute values in extended markup (inside the QTI <itemmetadata>
element, note that a more elaborated version should use the IMS vocabulary facility).
If a non-common function needs to be used, a fragment of MathML (http://www.w3.org/TR/MathML2/)
can be used to provide an arbitrary function definition.
The ASI Assessment Engine described in the QTI spec should be responsible for
exploiting ICC data in test administration and data processing, according to
IRT principles.
Other proposed additions
We think that there are other aspects that fall in the scope of the QTI specification
that are worth examining. For example, currently, presentation options are mixed
with the item itself, and two slightly different renderings for the same item
result in different item elements - this is shown in (Smythe, 2001, p.30-33).
By separating the item contents (that is, text or media independent of layout
options along with metadata) and item rendering in different markup elements,
we could enable the concept of rendering templates for items, and redundancy
can be avoided if more than one presentation scheme is being interchanged for
the same item (or perhaps you could interchange only the item contents, and
discard presentation issues). A template could be defined as a <presentation>
QTI element applicable to a specific type of item (of course, the definition
of templates requires a new XML 'sub-language').
In addition, there are some information attributes that could be specified as
attributes of the association between an item and an assessment (or a section)
rather than as item's attributes. For example, in QTI the <rtiming> attribute
inside an item definition indicates whether or not the responses are time-dependent,
but in some situations we'd want to define item q as time-dependent in assessment
A, but as time-independent in assessment B.
Broadening the Scope of the Specification
Although it falls out of the current scope of the QTI specification, questionnaires
are used in other areas of educational systems besides student knowledge's assessments.
More specifically, questionnaires are a commonly used method in the evaluation
of both teaching quality and functionality and usability of learning technology.
These kinds of questionnaires are of a different nature than those described
in the QTI specification, since they measure attitudes or subjective satisfaction
rather than knowledge. For example, questionnaires are used in (Taylor et al,
1998) in course development phase and also when the course was running, and
a questionnaire-based usability evaluation of a Web learning system is described
as a part of an evaluation framework for Web learning environments in (Veen
et al, 2000).
The last out-of-scope aspect we'd like to note about QTI is related to the Content
Packaging IMS specification (Anderson, 2001). This specification provides the
functionality to describe and package learning materials into interoperable,
distributable sets. Although commercial learning environments do not always
provide learning paths, the definition of graphs of possible paths across knowledge
modules is an strategy that enables learning personalization - a review can
be found in (Brusilovsky, 2000) -, and can be integrated with IMS specs, as
described in (Martinez, 2001). Navigating from a node to the following one is
determined by the knowledge level of the student, which is usually assessed
by a test. Content Packaging specification can be extended to include the possibility
of specifying the assessment associated to the vertex between two nodes, making
a reference to the test (defined through QTI structures) that evaluates the
required knowledge to progress in the course.
References
Anderson, T. & McKell, M. (2001). IMS Content Packaging Information Model, Version 1.1.2. IMS Public Specification, August 2001. Available at: http://www.imsproject.org/
Brusilovsky, P. (2000). Adaptive hypermedia: From intelligent tutoring systems to Web-based education. In: G. Gauthier, C. Frasson and K. VanLehn (eds.) Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1839, Springer Verlag.
Gouli, E., Kornilakis, H., Papanokolaou, K. & Grigoriadou, M. (2001). Adaptive assessment improving interaction in an educational hypermedia system. In: N. Avouris and N. Fakotakis (eds) Advances in Human-Computer Interaction I, Typorama.
Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H. & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. SAGE Publications.
Martinez, J. J., Sicilia, M. A. & García, E. (2001). Extending IMS course structures for conditional learning path support. Paper presented at the 3rd International Symposium on Computers in Education, September, Viseu, Portugal.
Shepherd, E. Brewer, L. & Lay, S.(2001). IMS Question & Test Interoperability: An Overview, Version 1.2, IMS Public Draft Specification, September 2001. Available at http://www.imsproject.org/
Smythe, C. (2001). IMS Question & Test Interoperability Best Practice & Implementation Guide Final Specification, Version 1.1, IMS Public Specification, March 2001. Available at: http://www.imsproject.org/
Smythe, C. & Shepherd, E. (2001). IMS Question & Test Interoperability Information Model Specification, Version 1.1, IMS Public Specification, February 2001. Available at http://www.imsproject.org/
Taylor, J., Woodman, M., Sumner, T. & Blake, K.T. (2000). Peering through a glass darkly: Integrative evaluation of an on-line course. Educational Technology & Society, 3 (4).
Veen, J. T., Boer, W. & Ven, M. (2000). W3LS: Evaluation framework for World Wide Web learning. Educational Technology & Society, 3 (4).
Weiss, D. J. & Schleisman, J. L (1997). Adaptative testing. Educational Research Methodology and Measurement: An International Handbook 2nd ed. Pergamon.
|
Elena García Barriocanal Miguel Ángel Sicilia Urbán |
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to present a research proposal for the creation of
learning communities during the graduation period. The use of PBL (Project/Problem
Based Learning) approaches and a virtual platform can be the facilitative factors
for the creation of these communities. We propose that learning communities
created through such a process will be able to continue their existence after
the graduation, involving external actors and promoting a real long-life learning
process.
Introduction
The traditional structure of a higher education grade is supported by a set
of courses. It is expected that the set of courses, as a whole, should provide,
to each student, some personal knowledge, some individual and collective competencies
and technical skills. At the moment of the graduation, it is expected that each
student will be able to perform a certain profession. We identify some difficulties
concerning this perspective of higher education. Some of them are:
Vision
Our vision for higher education is based on the premise that, during the graduation
period, each student must become a member of one or more learning communities.
Each learning community is built by, and with, students and teachers (being
facilitators and, also, learners) and, hopefully, should include third parties,
as entrepreneurs or external consultants (interested in new knowledge and in
the possibility of taking part of the educational process that will provide
new professionals). The learning community exists in the virtual world, and
all of their members share the use of a computer-based collaborative system.
Each member has full access to the collaborative system and, consequently, has
access to the knowledge of their learning community.
Figure 1 illustrates our vision. There, we can see that each student will be
part of, at least, one learning community. This community is created during
the graduation period (yellow). During this period, it is expected that third
parties will be involved (blue). After the graduation, the community is maintained
(orange). The maintenance of the learning community depends on the collaborative
system they use, which must be sponsored by the university or in partnership
with other entities.
Figure 1 - A vision for developing learning communities in a single university.
The collaborative system must have some characteristics and provide some tools:
This vision has more possibilities. For example, a learning community originated
in a university can be crossed in the future with another community from another
university, as is illustrated in figure 2.
Figure 3 presents another possibility. We can imagine a situation in which one
community involves people from more than one university. This could be possible
in partnerships between universities or between similar courses in different
universities. The universities involved can be from different countries.
Figure 2 - Crossing learning communities from different universities.
Figure 3 - Developing one learning community supported by different universities.
PBL and the Use of Information and Communication Technologies
A major question emerges at this moment: how can we create, nurture and maintain such communities of learners? We hypothesize that one possible way is through courses based on PBL approaches (Kjaersdam, 1994; Powel 2000). PBL approaches were already applied in several universities (Aalborg, Twente, Delaware, Aveiro, among others). We can characterize generally these approaches pointing that the focus of process:
Research Challenges
We can now contribute with one research challenge for technology supported
learning. The challenge is: how can we use PBL approaches to create, nurture
and maintain learning communities, created during the graduation period (in
a course that uses the PBL approach, at least during part of it), involving
third parties (i.e., business) before the end of the graduation period, and
lasting their existence after the graduation period? Which technological infrastructure
is necessary to be used/created/develop to this end?
Conclusion
To become successful, the long life learning concept depends on an efficient
continuous learning process and needs to be supported by effective learning
communities. Using adequate technological infrastructures and methodological
approaches like PBL we can achieve that goal easily.
At our school, we have a special course that uses PBL approach. Quite naturally
and without being conscious of, students and lecturers create informal learning
communities during this course. Those communities are, in some ways, like learning
communities described in this paper. Given this, we are now designing in detail
a plan for action that we are considering to submit as a proposal to our school,
in order to stimulate, develop and formalize the creation of future long-life
learning communities based on that course.
References
Davenport, T., and Prusak, L. (1998). Working Knowledge: How Organizations
Manage What They Know. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.
Huber, G. (1991). Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the
Literatures. Organization Science, 2(1), 88-115.
Kjaersdam, F., and Enemark, S. (1994). The Aalborg Experiment: Project Innovation
in University Education. Aalborg, Denmark: Aalborg University Press.
Powel, P. (2000). From Classical to Project-led Education. In Pouzada, A. S.
(ed.) 2000. Project Based Learning: Project-led Education and Group Learning.
Braga: Universidade do Minho, pp. 11-40.
|
Joao Batista & Eleuterio Machado |
Looking for a way to increase discussion on a topic we like to talk a lot about, we came up with the idea of holding a virtual conference called "Best Practices in Journalism Education: An International Web Conference." The initial idea was for an online conference on a grand scale-invited papers from big names, plentiful submissions from around the world, an engaging discussion on each paper, and even a CD-ROM containing all papers and the threaded discussions to participants. To achieve this scale would require promotion, dedicated webspace, and registration oversight-skills the authors do not have. For these, we turned for help to an organization experienced at managing conferences, the World Campus at Penn State.
Following World Campus guidelines, Berner met with a team of himself, a marketing person, a program developer and a program manager. The team quickly learned that duplicating the CD-ROMs and sending one to each participant would increase the cost of the conference to $125. So the CD-ROM was dropped, and, after some calculations, the team decided that a $95 registration fee would cover the cost at Penn State.
The marketing member of the team purchased a mailing list from the Association of Education in Journalism and Mass Communications, and Berner and Grow began promoting the web conference via on-line discussion groups. In the meantime, the World Campus sent an announcement to everyone on the AEJMC mailing list. The international journal Journalism Studies agreed to be a co-sponsor and to publish one free advertisement about the conference.
After some discussion, we decided to hold the conference on March 25-April 1, 2001. Earlier and we would have bumped into spring break at many universities; later and we would have collided with end-of-semester activities. We also did not want the conference to compete with AEJMC's annual convention in August.
Meanwhile, the conference received word-of-mouth promotion among colleagues at other meetings. When Berner attended the Journalism Educators Association conference in Mooloolaba, Queensland, he was given an opportunity to promote the web conference to the assembled group. In addition, he sought out attendees whose papers fit the web conference's theme and encouraged them to submit their papers to the web conference.
During early planning sessions, Grow had argued that the fee would be a problem since most faculty would see themselves as doing the conference organizers a favor by submitting papers and would not want to pay a conference fee on top of that. Grow also pointed out that faculty were accustomed to free listservs. Berner argued that faculty paid to attend face-to-face conferences and give papers. Surprisingly, the fee argument Berner heard in Australia focused not on the reasons for the fee, but on the exchange rate between the Australian and U.S. dollar-about 50 cents on the dollar.
We received a total of nine papers: three from Australia, two from the United States and one each from India, The Netherlands, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. (We had also been promised papers from Bulgaria, China and Taiwan.) Of these, only two came unannounced. We estimate that about 25 people participated or lurked, nine of whom submitted anonymous evaluations at the end. Some of the responses from participants, and our own reflections, may be of interest to anyone thinking of conducting a web conference.
Generally, comments about the fee suggested benchmarking with other conferences and being making adjustments in the fee to compensate for the exchange rate. But two participants emphasized that for any fee to be acceptable the quality of the papers had to be better. They needed to be, in the words of one, "unique and not offered elsewhere for free." Along those lines, another participant suggested recruiting speech and English professors to contribute papers giving their take on writing methodologies and mentoring work.
Most respondents thought the content was fine but wanted more papers. One respondent suggested "papers by big names (invited papers)." We did invite some people to submit papers, but since the main purpose of the conference was to help faculty improve their papers so they could later be presented at some other conference or in a journal article, we weren't looking for stars. We would argue that "big names" could scare away the very people the conference was trying to reach. We did try to reprint a somewhat provocative speech by an editor to serve as a keynote, but he never responded to our request to use his speech.
During the online conference, Berner and Grow attempted to stimulate discussion by posting questions for each paper. The results were mixed, and one participant wondered if each submitter had not posed questions at the end of his/her paper. One participant revealed that he had sent his comments to the authors directly rather than posting them, which, of course, counters the point of having a conference at which people share ideas with everyone.
The technology used in an online conference is always an issue, especially in an international conference. In designing the online appearance of conference material, we tried to be as minimalist as we could, using frames so we could maintain a table of contents on the side and not force participants to rely on a back click to find a site recently visited. The bulletin board seemed to work fine, although when it was moved from a secure server to a public server, it changed into a format that offered a confusing number of choices. One participant suggested we should have mailed instructions ahead of time, just to reduce the initial confusion.
Participants themselves were divided on how an online conference should present itself. One suggested that we not use "frames, javascripts or macromedia animations" because "not everyone has a T1 connection." But two others said we should have had material that takes advantage of the Web's many audio, video and visual features. The experience of running the conference has left us favoring our initial decision to keep the layout simple.
We were able to find out about a few unanticipated successes brought about by the conference. A journal editor who knew about the content of the paper the Chinese professor promised to write tracked him down through Berner and offered to publish the paper. And another participant, this one from a small country with few journalism programs, said the web conference provided her a way of writing a paper that she then revised for a later face-to-face conference - a revision that cited two of the papers from the web conference.
Our conclusions about the conference are mixed. We are pleased with our initial efforts and encourage others to recognize that such a conference could be built into something substantial and recurring, and that it has the potential to provide a valuable service to emerging scholars. However, we also discovered that we are reluctant to invest the substantial amount of time required to mount such a conference again. It required significant planning and a major commitment of time and effort. The marketing and promotion were expensive and also time consuming. Some web conferences manage to keep their fees under US$50 by means of subsidies from sponsors. If a faculty member has access to the necessary server, a no-fee conference would be feasible-provided someone finds it professionally worthwhile to donate the substantial amount of time such a conference requires. But we doubt that universities, many of which have invested heavily in technology and operate on a cost-recovery basis, will welcome free conferences on their servers. However, web conferences, especially international ones, may become more feasible, respectable, and popular, if university travel budgets tighten and people remain skittish about getting on airplanes.
Like telecommuting, videoconferencing and virtual committee meetings, the web conference remains one of the tantalizing-though not quite fulfilled-promises of the digital age.
R. Thomas Berner is a professor of journalism and American studies at the Pennsylvania State University and the College of Communications' director of continuing and distance education.
is a professor of journalism at Florida A&M University
|
R. Thomas Berner Gerald Grow |
Periods of rapid change create a premium on learning--for both individuals and organizations. Prosperity and growth are the rewards for those who are the fastest at learning and putting their learning into actions. In an era when it is knowledge rather than physical assets that increasingly defines competitive advantage, the process of managing knowledge becomes a central part of the learning process.
The business imperative to accelerate organizational learning has created new functions within organizations to speed up the process of creating, capturing, and disseminating information and knowledge. The same forces that are creating a focus on knowledge management are causing firms to develop their learning strategies. As training moves to learning, more and more organizations are looking to foster a learning environment to piggyback on training or to create an architecture in which learning, both formal and informal, is ongoing and consistent.
Problem / Opportunity
Cutting-edge organizations regard human knowledge and development, and the management of that knowledge and development, pivotal to its competitive advantage. Many such organizations have adopted Knowledge Management (KM) the process of capturing and utilizing intellectual resources, both explicit and implicit, to improve its organizational performance.
Knowledge Management is not just about technology, it is not solely about information repositories, and is not singly about organizational learning. KM is comprised and a combination of all three. Envisioning KM as the 'bigger picture', the focus of this article is primarily on the organizational learning component, and specifically on Learning Management Systems (LMS). Organizations are challenged with the development of an enterprise-wide learning strategy that is in sync with the organization's goals and missions, and then to manage this strategy. Emerging Learning Management Systems (LMS) may provide the tools and methods to address this challenge.
LMS, and e-learning in general, have already, in their short but frenzied history, changed the way corporations look at its organizational performance. But for all the impressive tales of better learning and higher efficiency, the flourishing offerings in LMS have brought with them a mountain of chaos. What is an LMS? What are its features, advantages and benefits? And ultimately, is it a necessary tool for implementing a learning organization's KM strategies? These are all questions that face today's learning organizations.
LMS Defined
The utilization of LMS is the application of technology to create an integrated training and knowledge management system that enables an organization - and all the individuals who support that organizations - to share their knowledge and convert that knowledge into a training system that is based on organizational learning objectives. In other words, LMS are the central hub for learning, knowledge management, performance management, and more.
More specifically, LMS are software programs that deploy, manage, track and report on the interaction between the learner and the content, and between the learner and the instructor. LMS perform student registration, track learner progress, record test scores, and indicate course completions, and finally allow instructors/trainers/managers to assess the performance of the learners. Yet LMS are more than an automated registration system, more than online course directory or file management system, and more than a record keeping database focused on training activities.
At this point in history LMS are any and all of the above. LMS provide tools that help author, archive and manage learning assets. They are tracking systems that produce countless reports for students and management alike. The definition is changing daily as new technologies emerge and as we discover new ways to take advantage of such systems to solve real business problems.
LMS Features
Features common to LMS products are listed below.
LMS vendors are promising to:
LMS Market Trends
The LMS market will rival the customer relationship management (CRM) industry
in size and importance over the next five years, according to a recent report
from W.R. Hambrecht and Co., a financial services firm in San Francisco (www.wrhambrecht.com/research/coverage/
elearning/ir/index.html). Hambrecht predicts the LMS will become as pervasive
as CRM and enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems. And prices are expected
to rise to those of more mature enterprise applications
Corporate buyers are becoming more sophisticated. The decision-making process for LMS implementations was about six months a year ago; buyers now take only three or four months, on average, to decide on an LMS purchase. Also buyers are far more concerned about features and integration than price. (onlinelearning, July 2001)
ROI matters more. In the current economic environment, buyers are increasingly concerned about proving a return on their LMS investment. In response, LMS vendors are better prepared to give potential customers ROI statistics and analyses,
Vendors are looking more alike. As the leading LMS vendors continue working toward the same goal of object-oriented platforms with additional features and functionality, their systems will look more and more alike from a customer's point of view. The companies that stand out will be the ones that provide the best service and implement their systems the fastest, as well as the ones with the greatest brand awareness and customer base.
Organizations should be leery of the promises that LMS vendors make in regards to KM. Some vendors are alluding (in not right-out stating) that by using their product, your organization will be a KM organization. Utilizing LMS are only steps to reach the goal of KM; they are not the complete answer.
References:
Aldrich, C. (2001). Meeting of the Minds: Get ready for a big merger - the one between knowledge management and e-learning. OnlineLearning. Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 74 - 75.
ASTD Research (2001). Trends in Workplace: Knowledge Management. Training & Development. Retrieved October 2001 from the World Wide Web: http://www.astd.org/CMS/templates/index.html
Gale, S.F. (2001). Assembly Required: How a team of do-it-yourselfers from DaimlerChrysler built their own learning management system. OnlineLearning. February. (pp. 23-26).
Hall, B. (2000, May). Resources for enterprise-wide e-learning initiatives. E-learning [online magazine]. Retrieved March 2001 from the World Wide Web: http://elearningmag.com/issues/may00/cover.htm
Hall, B. (2000). Start Spreading the Word: how to develop an enterprise-wide e-learning strategy. Inside Technology Training. Reprinted from the March 2000 issue.
Hartnett, J. (2001) As Good as it Gets: Are authoring and learning management systems living up to their promise? OnlineLearning. Vol. 5, No. 3. pp. 68 - 72.
Huseman, R.C.,Ph.D., Goodman, J.P., Ph.D. (1999). Leading with Knowledge: the nature of competition in the 21st century. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Pieters, G.R., Ph.D. (2000). The Ever-Changing Organization: creating the capacity for continuous change, learning and improvement. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press LLC.
2001 Buyer's Guide. (2000). OnlineLearning. v4 n11.
Wetzel, M., (2001), Changes ahead for LMS market, OnlineLearning. Vol. 5, No.7, pp 13.
Zielinski, R., (2000). Can Anyone Tell Me What An LMS Is?. E-learning. Reprinted from the October 2000 issue.
|
Kelli J. Bosman |
Abstract
Students are able to easily facilitate complex learning activities and create their own knowledge in all key learning areas using a collaborative learning technology.
New tools for learning faster
Trials of a new collaborative learning technology in Australia are leading to its use in school classrooms to scaffold facilitation, knowledge creation and thinking skills.
Learners work in teams and facilitate their own sessions to discover new ideas, concepts, frameworks and paradigms for themselves. They create their own new knowledge rather than being told it, a problem well identified by leading educators (Scardamalia and Berieter).
The system is installed in 80 schools in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Secretary for State for Education Estelle Morris experienced it first hand in December 2001 when they visited Greensward College in Essex. They participated in a science class where students collaborated to derive chemical formula from first principles.
Fig 1. UK Prime Minister Blair and Education Secretary Morris participate in a Zing session.
The Zing Classroom system comprises:
Fig 2. Mount Hutton, Australia, Primary classroom using the Zing GDSS system
In the classroom, teachers can use the system to:
Fig 3: Zing User Interface.
Trials of Team learning
The research was undertaken in 1999-2000 by the author (the developer of the
Zing system) and five teachers at the Conservatorium High School (CHS), Sydney.
Science and mathematics classes in Years 7-12 worked through complete thinking processes as a class with small groups each sharing a keyboard. The technology was used as a capture and display device. The class then discussed which ideas made sense and which did not, or summarised what had been learned.
The following case studies show how the system was applied to teaching in a collaborative environment.
Learning by error correction and detection
Twelve students from Conservatorium High School from years 7 through 10 were assigned to an experiment in remedial mental arithmetic. Instead of 12 weeks of extra lessons, students attended four one-hour Zing sessions.
The session was designed so the students would discover their errors for themselves and devise improvements. The method was borrowed from the business world, where quality consultants help teams design new work procedures and willingingly adopt the new methods because no one is blamed for past failures.
It was expected that the mathematics students would be more amenable to solutions they helped devise. This is what occurred. When tested prior to the trial, the average error rate was 7.5 mistakes out of the 20 of the most common errors. At the end of the trial, the students were re-tested and the error rate had dropped to 1.5 mistakes out of 20.
At the first session, the students were presented with 100 multiplication tables problems, 8x4, 9x 12, 7x7 etc. using the Zing system. Students submitted their ideas blind and completed the entire sequence of questions before reviewing the results.
At the end of the session, the students reviewed all their responses and made a note of their errors, generally the higher factor 7x, 8x, 9x and 12x tables. They then brainstormed a list of ideas for reducing their error rate.
Students also created ascending and descending series of numbers such as down from 108 by 9s and then identified patterns and soon discovered that difficult-to-remember multiplication tables could be inferred from an easy-to-remember set of tables.
Designing "good guessing" methods
CHS science classes used the technology to explore astronomy topics. They also invented their own method for forming hypotheses.
The students were shown pictures from the Hubble Space Telescope web site. Each of the 12 keyboards was assigned to a team of 2-3 students. Each team selected a picture of an astronomical object such as a planet, star or galaxy, then submitted their guess for review. The guesses were read out and compared with the website.
Each team then devised a 4-5 step guessing method that was then refined by the facilitator to use for the next round of guessing, which led, after several rounds of improvement to achieve the following method:
1. Collect data
2. Compare with known information
3. Suggest possibilities
4. Eliminate unlikely candidates
5. Guess
Not only did the students create their own knowledge about the astronomical objects but they also developed an intuitive understanding of a process for solving other problems in science.
Conclusions
Collaborative learning systems which scaffold thinking methods, the etiquette for computer collaboration and on-line facilitation techniques have the potential to help make it easier for teachers to teach in teams and shift the responsibility for the creation or adaptation of the knowledge from the teacher to the learner.
References
Findlay, J. (1997). Accelerated Knowledge Creation and Teamwork. Technology Business Review, No.1. pp. 9-13
Scardamalia, M. & Berieter, C. Technologies for Knowledge - building discourse, Communications of the ACM, 36 (5) pp.37-41.
|
John Findlay, MBA |
Over the past decade or so online learning has become an important part of education as Web-based technologies become better equipped to deliver a wide range of content formats across virtually all subjects. The introduction of many Web-based course-authoring tools, often called courseware, has made it relatively easy for educators to develop and manage educational content on the Web. While these tools have evolved rapidly in recent years, advances have been geared toward management of educational content, rather than the delivery of adaptable content that accommodates a diverse range of learners.
In an attempt to address the relative absence of adaptive learning environments within currently available courseware, the ATutor project was conceived. ATutor is an Open Source project in which public contributions are possible, and the software is freely available under the GNU General Public License (GPL) for non-commercial use. ATutor is also based on other Open Source technologies including the Apache Web server, PHP hypertext preprocessing language, and the MySQL database, each available freely for non-commercial use. This paper describes ATutor's early development and directions for future versions of the software.
Adapting content to individual skills and learning styles
ATutor addresses two key aspects of delivering adaptive Web-based educational content: the adaptation of informational structure, and the adaptation of perceptual presentation. Adaptation of informational structure consists of presenting content to accommodate global, hierarchical, or linear learning preferences, while adaptation of perceptual presentation consists of delivering content to accommodate visual, verbal, and experiential learning preferences. Typically learners will combine a number of structural and perceptual formats to mold the content to their liking.
To accommodate structural preferences ATutor offers a variety of navigation tools that allow learners to move through the information being presented in many different ways. For those who prefer to develop a "big picture" of the content being studied, often described as global learners, a collapsible main menu presents a complete list of topics with quick access links to each. Links between related information also allow global learners to jump around the content to better understand the relationships between concepts being learned. For learners who would rather structure the information in a hierarchical manner, breadcrumb links, heading links, and history links allow them to navigate "up and down" through the information. For learners who would rather learn in a linear manner, sequence links allow learners to move "back and forth" through a sequential presentation of the same information.
To accommodate perceptual preferences a number of presentation options allow learners to adapt the information to an image rich or a text-based presentation, to adjust the "theme" to present the information in a number of different colour schemes, and to adjust the layout, positioning navigation tools to suite their preferences. To accommodate experiential learning a variety of "Learning Concept" icons can be included throughout the content by designers to trigger various types of thought, allowing learners to add experience to the information they are reading about.
Figure 1 A screen shot of A Tutor. Main navigation links appear at the top and bottom of the screen. Breadcrumb links appear immediately below the main navigation at the top, and immediately above the main navigation at the bottom. Sub menu navigation appears below the breadcrumb links at the top, including topic and section navigation, links to related information, and links to a history of pages recently visited. The Main Menu appears to the right.
Building content
Content designers can easily assemble their educational materials through the online authoring tools available in ATutor. The designer will typically define a set of topics and subtopics in a given content area, and use those topics to construct a main menu. While constructing the menu, placeholder pages are created for each topic into which content can be added. For advanced designers HTML formatting can be used to create customized presentations, or to add multimedia components to their content.
Content is structured up to 4 levels deep: topics, subtopics, sections, and subsections allowing designers to add a fine-grained structure to the information being presented. Links can be made to related information by selecting from a drop down menu any of the other pages included in the content. Images can be uploaded and inserted anywhere throughout the content. Where a particular "mind set" will aid in learning a specific piece of information, Learning Concept icons can be added by the designer to trigger particular thoughts in the learner (e.g. think critically, a discussion topic, an important piece of information…)
Accessibility
The primary focus for ATutor has been on accommodating learners with special needs, though an adaptive learning environment can benefit any learner. By offering an environment that can be "molded" to the characteristics of a particular learner, one with a learning disabilities for instance, content can be adapted to match the individual's profile of learning strengths. By offering an environment that is fully accessible to learners using assistive technology to access the Web, ATutor ensures an inclusive online classroom, accessible by the blind or those with severe motor impairments for example. ATutor complies with AA accessibility standards as described in the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines.
Directions
This first phase of the ATutor project has produced the authoring tool for content developers, and the adaptive learning environment for online learners.
The second phase will focus on developing a tracking and feedback system that monitors learners' navigation patterns and preference settings, adjusts the environment to accommodate those patterns and settings, and provide feedback to inform users about the learning tendencies they exhibit. Feedback will teach users about themselves as learners, making them aware of cognitive skills and habitual tendencies associated with learning.
The data collected through ATutor during the second phase will provide a rich source of information about learning behaviour in Web-based learning environments, an area of research currently in its infancy.
The third phase will see the development on an institutional version of ATutor that will adapt to large educational settings.
Conclusion
The Web has opened up a whole new medium for delivering education, and our educational practices must be adjusted to incorporate what has been described as the "ultimate in educational tools". Like other mediums the potential of the Web to exclude certain groups is quite possible, with particular groups unable to access or benefit from information because of characteristics associated with a disability. This need not be the case. By addressing accessibility issues, including skill level and learning tendencies, it is possible to create an adaptive online learning environment inclusive to all learners.
More information, a demo, and a download are available on the ATutor Web site at http://www.atutor.ca.
|
Greg Gay |
Introduction
Student centered learning in complex subjects requires the application of a sophisticated theory of cognition to course design. Instructional techniques and strategies that work at the knowledge and comprehension stages of cognitive development may actually inhibit learning at the more advanced levels. Helping learners to achieve the evaluation and synthesis stages of cognitive development requires a cognitive paradigm that focuses on critical thinking and knowledge transfer. Cognitive flexibility is a case-based approach for the improvement of upper-level cognitive skills, particularly the ability to transfer knowledge to novel situations. A fundamental issue in applying the cognitive flexibility approach to course design is how to develop a web interface that is faith to the underlying theory and still practical in terms of student learning. This article describes the application of knowledge management software, The Brain, to achieving these ends.
Case-Based Approach
According to Spiro, et al (R. Spiro, P. Feltovich, M. Jacobson, and R. Coulson,
1995), cognitive flexibility is the "ability to spontaneously restructure
one's knowledge in many ways, in adaptive response to radically changing situational
demands." In complex environments, learners generally cannot retrieve an
intact learning structure from memory; instead the mind combines, recombines,
and reinvents structural components to meet the requirements of each particular
situation. Spiro, et al contend that these impediments can be overcome by moving
from a learning process that emphasizes the retrieval from memory of intact
preceding knowledge to a system that stresses the flexible reassembly of preexisting
knowledge to fit the needs of various situations.
The following four points summarize the cognitive flexibility approach to learning.
While this approach focuses on case-based learning, it goes beyond the prototype case as an illustration of an abstract concept. Learners must be exposed to many case experiences in order to emphasize the multifaceted nature of complex environments. By seeing multiple representations of the same phenomenon learners develop the mental scaffolding necessary for considering novel applications within the knowledge domain. They begin to think about how they recognize and analyze a new situation.
System Components
As a learning system, cognitive flexibility is constructed on the four strategic components shown in the diagram below.
Web Interface
The application of cognitive flexibility hypertext to case-based learning requires a web interface that emphasizes theme paths rather than the traditional hierarchical structures. Hierarchical course structures are useful and improve on unstructured environments, particularly for students just beginning a subject. However, hierarchical menu structures are incapable of expressing the web of associative links that combine to form the subject matter of a topic or course. The interface that is needed in this environment is one that allows entry into the subject matter through any theme path. A software tool meeting these requirements is a knowledge management tool called The Brain developed by The Brain Technologies Corp. The figure below illustrates The Brain's plex.
The plex houses The Brain's thoughts. In this context, thoughts include the information that demarcates the course or topic being considered. Any descriptive material about the thought process that the designer wants to include can be entered in the text area above the plex. Thoughts can be active or inactive at varying points or positions in the plex. For example, in the diagram above, sample course structure is the active thought and the comprehensive cases and themes are inactive thoughts. Within this thought structure any piece of information can be associated with and visually linked to any other piece of information. In this case the themes are child thoughts to the parent comprehensive cases. Note that in this example, theme 1 is linked to comprehensive cases 1 and 2 but could be an element common to all of the cases. The diagram below illustrates the pathways to the mini-cases through the gateway themes.
In this example theme 1 becomes the active thought. Theme 1 has two explanatory
mini-cases. Mini-case 2 connects directly to theme 3. No matter which theme
is the active thought, all of the themes are available for the learner's use
in understanding the course material. Clicking on any one of them will activate
it and reveal its pathways to the other thoughts. The mini-cases reveal another
thought structure for understanding the themes and comprehensive case situations
(agglomeration of themes). Mini-cases explain and highlight various aspects
of the theme being considered, in this case theme 1. Mini-case 1 has two perspectives
that re-enforce concepts within the mini-case and connect to other aspects in
mini-case 2. The theme remains present in the plex so the learner can quickly
reconstitute the original course structure and refresh their memories about
the theme pathways.
The cognitive flexibility paradigm emphasizes the transferability of knowledge
from one situation to another. As expressed by Jacobson, 1991, "transferability
involves the reconfiguration of knowledge by the learner in response to being
confronted with novel facts or a new situation." The primary goal of the
cognitive flexibility approach is to enhance the learner's capability to flexibly
reassemble the thematic dimensions in novel situations.
Transfer scenarios are easily included within the structure of the plex to provide a basis for the formative or summative evaluation learner progress. The plex below illustrates this aspect of the course structure. The actual evaluative scenario would be included in the textbox above the plex.
Conclusions
The cognitive flexibility approach to course design highlights case analysis.
However, the focus is really on experiences in analyzing the particular thematic
dimensions that define the topic being discussed. The emphasis is on multiple
representations of thematic dimensions and connectivity among important case
elements. This approach lends itself well to a hypertext instructional environment.
This type of interface allows the learner to proceed through different levels
of the material by starting or moving to any point in the thought process (plex).
Flexibility is enhanced over the hierarchical structure that forces the learner
to proceed in a linear fashion. The Brain interface facilitates random access
instructional design, a hallmark of the cognitive flexibility approach. Random
access in this context means using knowledge flexibly; that is, developing understandings
without having to proceed through a sequential retrieval process from its inception.
References
Jacobson, M. "Knowledge Acquisition, Cognitive Flexibility, and the Instructional
Application of Hypertext: A Comparison of Contrasting Designs for Computer-Enhanced
Learning Environments," Doctoral Thesis University of Illinois, 1991.
Spiro, R., P. Feltovich, M. Jacobson, and R. Coulson. "Cognitive Flexibility,
Constructivism, and Hypertext: Random Assess Instruction for Advanced Knowledge
Acquisition in Ill-Structured Domains." 1995.
|
Duane B. Graddy |
Abstract
Learning process at the global environment has been becoming the need of 21st centaury, which can be exploited carefully. Development in the computer technology can create a uniform strategy and plan irrespective of the boundary of country, age and culture. Present article highlights some interesting features related to global learning process for adults using information technology tools. We can effectively define and develop the indicators for the learning using the Internet for the adults.
Introduction
Developing computer technology especially for the World Wide Web creates a great challenge for the learning process and its implementation in the global environment. Every organization has been trying to explore latest tools and technology for its students. However, strategies and the learning processes are varying across the country, culture and age.
Apart from the technological challenges there are various other issues that can change the entire way of human thinking. We can find large enormous amount of information over the Internet and many of them are repetitive and duplicate in one or in other sense. Off course, these information are more or less useful in various ways to few or large number of people in some part of the world. However, these can be made highly useful to every person irrespective of the country, culture and age provided we could develop a uniform strategy and developmental plan.
There are additional factors, which also affect a local environment in the particular educational situations. There are apparent learning and teaching methodologies and philosophies among the different environment. There are also different teaching techniques and mental pictures for the delivery of different courses. However, distance education needs a uniform model or picture of our teaching philosophy in a so-called international atmosphere (or global atmosphere).
Many teachers at institutions world-wide are trying to explore the potential of the online environment to deliver material of the uniform quality to people. This is an exciting and challenging time not for only education while also for the students themselves. Online education is bringing uniform, timely and collaborative learning to the forefront and is also affecting the way traditional courses are taught to adults.
The minimum requirement for students to participate in an online course is access to a computer, the Internet, and motivation to succeed in a non-traditional classroom. Online courses provide not only an excellent method of course delivery while it is unbound by time, location or country or culture.
Adult learners in particular, find the online environment a convenient way to fit education into their busy lives. The ability to access a course from a home computer via the Internet, 24 hours a day, seven days a week is a tremendous incentive for this group to reach their academic and career goals.
Australian distance education detailed by Amundsen (1993), which is based on the six theoretical frameworks provided by Peters, Moore, Holmberg, Keegan, Garrison and Verduin, and Clark. According to Amusndsen, there are some principles required for the distance education, which should be incorporated into the corresponding material prepared. These can be expressed as:
Distance Versus Traditional Education
Research indicates that (Threlkeld and Brzoska 1994) the instructional format itself (e.g., interactive video vs. videotape vs. "live" instructor) has little effect on student achievement as long as the delivery technology is appropriate to the content being offered and all participants have access to the same technology. Why always we think that a distance education means only one young student sitting traditionally at remote place? We can also organise more than one student or as an entire classroom consisting of adult, young or other type of students at the remote place (e.g.: - video conferencing).
Research also suggests (Bernt & Bugbee 1993) that distant students bring
basic characteristics to their learning experience, which influences their success
in coursework. Distance education students are voluntarily seeking further education.
Normally the conventional instruction is perceived to be better organized and
comprehensively presentable than the distance education. Do we think that distant
students learn as much as students receiving traditional face-to-face instruction?
Research comparing distance education to traditional face-to-face instruction
indicates that teaching and studying at a distance can be as effective as traditional
instruction, when the method and technologies used are appropriate to the instructional
tasks, there is student-to-student interaction, and when there is teacher-to-
student timely feedback (Moore et al 1970, Verduin, Clark 1991). However, do
we think that it is really the picture in all subjects and even for the flexible
learning system?
Distance education for adults is typically not different. Adults are mature
minded and normally regarded as more responsible. Indicators for learning for
adults may be more positive provided we organize our courses, lecture material
and technology in such a way that it becomes a self-learning process in less
time in simplest language. Modern information technologies may be used to achieve
goal.
Adult Student Roles for Engagement in Learning
Explorer
Adult students discover concepts and connections and apply skills by interacting with the physical world, materials, technology, and other people. Such discovery-oriented exploration provides students with opportunities to make decisions while figuring out the components/attributes of events, objects, people, or concepts.
Cognitive Apprentic
Adult students become more and particular type of cognitive apprentices when they observe, apply, and refine through practice the thinking processes used by real-world practitioners. In this model, adult students reflect more than a normal traditional student on their practice in diverse and unique situations and across a range of tasks, experience and they articulate the common elements of their experiences. Since adults already have acquired experience in their life and therefore they can interact in his or her own way.
Producers of Knowledg
Adult students generate products for themselves and their community that synthesize and integrate knowledge and skills. Through the use of technology, such students increasingly are able to make their contribution to their field of working.
We can use the Internet in the lights of the above facts to develop the learning
indicators for the adults. In the table given below is the summary of the facts
that how modern information technologies may be useful to realize the corresponding
indicator:
| Indicator | Example of distance based teaching and learning methodology |
|---|---|
| Communication literacy | Use of self-expression to other similar fellow students and staff members. Can use e_mail or directly discuss with other users on the Internet |
| Understanding the technology | Working with the IT tools, Using practical skills with the computer. Can compare with the existing technology. |
| Self evaluation | Comparison of various assignments and their evaluation which are on the world wide web |
| Critical Approach | Knowledge of latest technological tools and their critical uses which are available on the Internet |
| Learning strategy | Range of tools and assignment are available using various type of audio visual equipments on the Internet |
Conclusion
The present article highlights and evaluates the learning principles for the adult students using the World Wide Web. Using the World Wide Web a uniform environment all over the world can be created which can interest to wider community. In this way we not only create a uniform platform for learning while we can also evaluate the learning principles and learner uniformly irrespective of country, time and culture.
References
Amundsen, C. (1993), The evolution of theory in distance education, In Keegan, D. (Ed) Theoretical principles of distance education. London:Routledge.1993.
Bernt, F.L. & Bugbee, A.C. (1993), Study practices and attitudes related to academic success in a distance learning programme. Distance Education, 13(1), 97-112.
Moore, M.G. & Thompson, M.M., with Quigley, A.B., Clark, G.C., & Goff, G.G. (1990). The effects of distance learning: A summary of the literature. Research Monograph No. 2. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University, American Centre for the Study of Distance Education. (ED 330 321).
Threlkeld, R. & Brzoska, K. (1994), 'Research in distance education in Distance Education: Strategies and Tools' B. Willis (Ed.), Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, Inc.
Verduin, J.R. & Clark, T.A. (1991). Distance education: The foundations of effective practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
|
Om Kumar Harsh |
Overview
Repeatedly, news headlines read: "Buffer overflow in vendor's product
allows intruders to take over computer!" This widespread programming mistake
is easy to make, exacerbated by the ubiquitous C language, and very simple to
exploit. The buffer overflow problem is our starting point for a security module
development grant at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (http://nsfsecurity.pr.erau.edu).
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University students are self-selected for future careers
in aviation engineering, intelligence studies, airlines, and the military. The
initial steps in this project are targeted topics to (1) maximize current security
content of the curriculum (2) assess student interest, and (3) increase faculty
competence and involvement. In addition to fitting into existing curricula (1)
modules should be interactive using current computing technology, (2) we should
apply standard methodology for designing and evaluating instructional modules,
and (3) the end results should be disseminated to other training sites.
The Buffer Overflow Module
Among programming bugs notable to the public [News], the "buffer overflow"
is vying with Y2K for top billing. A "buffer overflow" is said to
occur when a pointer (as in C) goes out of range to access memory beyond the
buffer. While Web explanations are readily accessible [IBM,RSA], traditional
textbooks do not directly address the problem. In addition, software testing
for the problem is often minimal at best.
The Buffer Overflow Module was an obvious starting point, given the notoriety
and persistence of the problem. It also fit well with our curricula, with its
first programming courses in C. Starting from an in-depth web search that identified
key papers, the undergraduate co-author developed the Java applet demonstration
prototype at http://nsfsecurity.pr.erau.edu/bom.
Our goal was to drive home the seriousness of buffer overflows. Our primary
measure of understanding was that the student as a future programmer never makes
a buffer overflow error and the student as future manager is able to take preventative
actions and to control the effects of buffer overflow attacks. The prerequisite
knowledge necessary for using the module would be about that of a beginning-programming
student in C.
The purpose of the Java applet is to provide a visual and animated representation
of the different concepts needed to understand buffer overflows. An abstract
machine was created in Java to hide details that might hinder the student's
understanding, such as the use of a specific memory architecture or assembly
code. The user of the applet can be a student trying to learn about buffer overflows
or a presenter using the software as a demonstration, perhaps on an overhead
projector.
In the abstract machine, a C program is shown on the left. In the color Java
applet, each function is a different color. Each function has a corresponding
executing code segment (on the right) that is painted the same color. The line
of code that is being executed is highlighted. The input and output of the program
is shown in the box on the upper right. If the buffer used to store the input
is overflowed then anything that comes after it in memory is overwritten. The
user of the applet plays the role of the attacker and tries to find an input
string that will circumvent the imaginary security measure.
Currently there are four lessons: one to demonstrate the stack structure of
activation records, another to demonstrate a buffer overflow attack that overwrites
data, the "stack smashing" lesson shown above, and a variation of
the "stack smashing" lesson to demonstrate how one particular defense
works. Developing new lessons takes very little time because of the object-oriented
approach.
Module Experience and Evaluation
Effective evaluation of educational processes can involve many strategies.
For interactive learning systems, evaluations are usually conducted in two phases:
ongoing formative evaluations during development and a summative evaluation
at the conclusion of development.
The goals of the initial analyses were to (1) better understand the preliminary
level of knowledge possessed by undergraduate computer science students of the
buffer overflow problem, (2) obtain student feedback on the effectiveness of
a java applet in presenting the material, and (3) obtain student feedback about
possible modifications or additions for best effectiveness when the applet is
presented without live interaction from the applet's author.
Formative evaluations thus far reveal that most students were not aware of the
details of the buffer overflow problem prior to the applet presentation in class,
and students were enthusiastic about the module content and Java applet. Comments
about the class presentation will be helpful in designing the module in the
next steps of development.
Next Steps
The next steps in development of the Buffer Overflow Module will involve transfer
of the live class presentation to a computer-based product. Our intent is to
distribute the module through the Internet and on CD-ROM. The interface will
be designed using authoring products such as Authorware and Flash (Macromedia).
The computer-based product will build around the buffer overflow Java applet
with the addition of supportive texts and detailed graphics that go beyond the
capabilities of Java.
Feedback gained from the students in initial evaluations of the module will
be incorporated into the authored interface, which we expect will undergo revisions
as user feedback is gathered at each level of development. Evaluation of the
module at the next stage will focus on assessment of the interface design and
content incorporation.
References
[IBM] G. McGraw and J. Viega, Make your software behave: Learning the basics
of buffer overflows, IBM Developer Works Series
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/overflows/
[RSA] N. Frykholm, Countermeasures against Buffer Overflow Attacks, RSA Tech
Note, http://www.rsasecurity.com/rsalabs/technotes/buffer/buffer_overflow.html.
[News] A. Ackerman, Microsoft, Oracle security flaws found, Mercury News, http://www.siliconvalley.com/docs/news/svfront/secur122101.htm
Supported by: NSF Award No. 0113627
Increasing Security Expertise in Aviation-oriented Computing Education: A Modular
Approach
A more detailed version of this document is available at: http://nsfsecurity.pr.erau.edu/bom/ncisse2002.pdf
|
Jedidiah R. Crandall, Susan L. Gerhart, Jan G. Hogle |
New computer-mediated communications technology now facilitates student-to-student pairwise and student-to-other-students interactivities for efficient cooperative group learning of foundational knowledge, and for collaborative group learning of non-foundational knowledge. What has been largely ignored in the past decade is the new utilizability of this technology for tutor-to-student feedback to each student which can be individually tailored to each student as 'intelligent feedback' initiating the student's intrinsic motivations to learn and consequently preempting dropout from distance education.
All the motivations to learn can be categorised as vocational, academic, personal, or as social motivation, and these sub-divided as either intrinsic or extrinsic. There are the three important sub-types of intrinsic personal motivation - challenge, curiosity (sensory, and cognitive), and fantasy (details Kawachi, 2000 ; 2002).
Intrinsic social motivation is the integrative motivation, while the intrinsic vocational, intrinsic academic and intrinsic personal motivations constitute the instrumental motivation. Integrative motivation has been identified through factor analysis and correlated with low quality learning. In contrast, open learning and distance education are much concerned with fostering a deep approach to studying, and to achieve this we need to stimulate the various instrumental motivations especially in adult distant students who are (unlike adolescents) less likely to hold integrative motivation. The adult student is often learning part-time, has family and other occupational commitments and is not choosing distance study for social or affiliative purposes. However, as younger and younger students now engage distance education, studies are showing that newcomers often during their first year of a foundational course demonstrate a specific want and need for the virtual 'coffee shop' or chat-room (sometimes extrinsically to discuss their anxieties and worries with the new technology, but occasionally to share concerns and insights forming a community of learning intrinsically that relates to fulfilling the objectives of the course). In an objective controlled study, Boling and Robinson (1999 : 170) found that there was some considerable trade-off (an inverse correlation) between distance students' satisfaction with social aspects of the course and the actual quality of learning achieved. This would suggest that integrative intrinsic social motivation may be not the best for deep quality learning and abstract learning valued in higher education.
Newcomers to distance education also demonstrate performative anxiety. Thus there is a role for fun to initiate intrinsic social motivation especially in adult students who often do not bring this integrative motivation with them to the course, and tend to feel isolated. The only educational role for fun is to reduce performative anxiety, and this leads to the development of a community of learning. Reduced performative anxiety directly leads to (however small or gradual) achievement in learning, and this initiation of achievement motivation (despite being extrinsic) can serve as a bridge to persistence in distance education.
From the very first email, web-postings, or conferencing, the tutor can begin guided conversations to initiate and promote the instrumental motivations for individual learning and in each participant for collaborative group learning. In particular (due to its one-to-one individualised nature), feedback from the tutor to each student about an assessable assigned piece of student output can be cognitively designed to initiate each and all of the intrinsic vocational, academic, and personal (challenge, curiosity, and fantasy) motivations. This would be 'intelligent feedback'.
Briefly, the tutor should elicit, involve and refer to the student's own (past, present, and future) individual needs and context (continually, since needs and context develop and change). The tutor should employ empathy - rephrasing the student's main points to establish mutual clarity and understanding, and at the same time give vicarious experience. Giving vicarious experience is either through giving examples so the student sees the topic in a new light with personal relevance to the student's own life (thereby initiating intrinsic vocational motivation) or through giving one's own experiences so the student sees the topic through the tutor's eyes and feels the tutor's passion for the topic (thereby initiating intrinsic academic motivation). The tutor interprets the course and moderates the difficulty level, so that each step may be achieved by the student. The tutor then explicitly explains what the student will be able to do or do better as a result from achieving the next step - and involving and referring to the student's needs and context this explanation should be personally meaningful (thereby initiating challenge). The tutor should use icons, text designs (with appropriate language), sounds and colours (thereby initiating sensory curiosity), give positive cognitive comments (praise) to reveal hitherto unforeseen complexity (thereby initiating cognitive curiosity). The tutor should show how the learning or skills to be achieved in the task forum (the fantasy) could be applied to the student's advantage in new contexts in the student's real present or future world (thereby initiating fantasy). This includes sharing with the student the rationale behind each learning task or interactivity (such as non-authentic online debate). Initiation of intrinsic fantasy personal motivation increases the perceived relevance of the learning task, and increases the ratio of perceived benefit to expended effort. The tutor also needs to give negative comments to correct misunderstanding and prevent fossilization. This reduces and dispels (the hitherto useful but no longer necessary) integrative intrinsic social motivation and thus releases the student to develop the instrumental motivations for deeper quality of learning as an independent learner or as a collaborative group learner.
Feedback should be immediate in order to closely guide and direct the individualised optimalisation of the student's subsequent activity to maximise quality learning achievement. Pacing can be used to moderate the difficulty level, and should allow sufficient time for the student to fully explore the task (freely to make mistakes) to achieve mastery. There is a case to be made for the tutor to hide the student's grade from the feedback in the early learning of foundational knowledge, so that no serious consequence is attached to these desirable explorations by the student.
In summary, 'intelligent feedback' can be designed based on cognitivism and social constructivist theory of learning, and deployed using the new communications technology which enables close interactivities for guided learning in distance education. By initiating the intrinsic motivations to learn, 'intelligent feedback' can preempt attrition and bring about desirable deep quality learning.
References
Boling, N.C., & Robinson, D.H. (1999). Individual Study, Inter
