Learning Design

1. Learning design

This presentation outlines the main theories in online learning design.

http://sprout.lakeheadu.ca/~gpassmor/TPID/Index/Index.html

2. Bloom's Taxonomy in relation to learning design

http://www.celt.iastate.edu/teaching/RevisedBlooms1.html?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=a-model-of-learning-objectives

A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing:
          A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives

Iowa State University

3. Online learning-ideas for tutors

Scaffolding

4. Learning Design@Weltec

Learning Design @ WelTec
Cheryl Brown

26^th September, 2013

Summary

There are several learning design approaches some of which I have identified here. I’ve focussed on some work coming out of the University of Leicester in which Laurillard, Conole and Salmon have participated. These three women are influential in the learning/eLearning world.

I’ve also taken a snap shot of how learning design happens at WelTec – from the Ed Tech perspective.

Finally I made some recommendations – which the readers are free to adapt and or adopt.

Cheryl Brown

2 October, 2013

Learning design and models for development

The overarching and commonly used model for development is the ADDIE model Analyse, Design, Develop, Implement, Evaluate.  WelTec adopts this approach by default and in theory, but in practice this may be less integrated than we’d desire.

An overarching model used for software development  and team management is AGILE. Some key points of AGILE are flexibility, integrated testing and an iterative approach (Waters, 2007).

This discussion looks at some ways that learning design has been incorporated into course developments and focus on Grainne Conole’s 7Cs of learning design at University of Leicester.

4.1. Some ideas about learning design

ARCs

Keller, developed a model of motivation called ARCS. He says that “….the ARCS model appears to provide useful assistance to designers and teachers…” (1987, p.1).  ARCS stands for Attention (both developing and sustaining it), Relevance (the way something is taught or its relevance for the student) and Confidence (achieving success).   To my knowledge this innovative design approach has not been widely used in New Zealand.

OTARA

A learning design option developed in New Zealand by Hunt & Moore (2005)  in New Zealand is OTARA— Objectives, Themes, Activities, Resources and Assessments. It’s a simple model that is scalable. Ed Tech attempted to use this as part of the CIA (Communicate, Integrate, Activate) approach but did not get any tutors picking up the idea. While it is simple and straightforward it does not follow any learning theories and it needs the addition of a column that identifies the core skills being taught too – it lacks the idea of scaffolding. It’s advantages are its simplicity and its scalability.

eLearning Guidelines

These have been developed by Massey University and are being updated for 2014. While they are not learning design principles they cover some ideas inherent in evaluating learning design.

Adapt

Collom, Dallas, Jong and Obexer (2002) describe a learning design model called adapt. Based on an analysis of existing practice they designed an approach, key to which is  the development of a common language. Adapt uses a 3 level grid that ( survival, consolidating and enhancing practice, exploring and experimenting) links to teaching ideas and suggestions under the headings of planning, design, development, delivery and continuous improvement.

Conversational Model

Laurillard  (2008, p. 1) says “A generic model for the use of technology in teaching practice is needed that is focused on the fundamentals of pedagogy, and an understanding of what it takes to learn. In effect, the model that is conceptualised around providing guidance for teachers in their analysis and facilitation of what it takes to learn, as well as support for planning, exemplars of learning designs, and advice on the use of the model for providing pedagogical-evaluative insight into a piece of learning design.”

She advocates the use of a Conversational Framework as a mid-way solution that brings together several learning theories in a project called Learning Design Support Environment (LDSE –www.ldse.org.uk).  The aim of this aspect of the larger LDSE “is aimed at enabling the teaching community to act rather like the research community (Laurillard 2008): to build on colleagues’ work, to discover new things for themselves, to share learning designs with the community, to collaborate, and, essentially, to problematise teaching.” (p. 4). The research looks at learning theories and measures how “current pedagogical design measure (s) up to the learning theory” (p.5).

Design principles, she says, enable generic support for the design process.  An example is the ‘seven principles for good practice in education’ (Chickering & Gamson, 1987; Nicol and MacFarlane-Dick; 2006 in Laurillard, 2008, p. 7):

1. Encourage contact between students and faculty;
2. Develop reciprocity and cooperation amongst students;
3. Encourage active learning;
4. Give prompt feedback;
5. Emphasise time on task;
6. Communicate high expectations;
7. Respect diverse talents and ways of learning.

The project uses learning design as a  ”pattern of design choices” (p.8) and using the Conversational Framework teachers and learners can see how they address these theories. The Conversational Framework aims to help teachers understand and implement the kinds of support students need to learn. There are iterative activities that teachers do and others that students are expected to do.

Table one. Adapted from (ibid, p 26). Contrasting pedagogical patterns and resulting outcomes

While this is a complex iterative model which would be time consuming to implement but provide good feedback and establish pedagogical patterns for us to adapt.

4.2. ADELIE & CARPE DIEM

Salmon, Jones and Armellini (2008, p.2) at the University of Leicester, U.K. describe the implementation of a “new e-learning and pedagogical innovation strategy ”  based  on a resource definition of change which looks at the institution’s  “core capabilities and existing strengths”.  The strategy looks at building the existing skill base as well as outreach and extension. Based on Laurillard (2007), it is pedagogically rather than technology led and uses an initial workshop approach called CARPE DIEM designed to encourage small teams to work together on e-learning design using pedagogical experts, a subject librarian, a learning technologist and subject specialists. UoL used storyboarding, team working, scaffolding, and other tasks in a process supported by the whole institution.  CARPE DIEM was part of a larger project called ADELIE  (Advanced Design for E-Learning Institutional Embedding) which featured other workshops, share sessions and seminars. During the CARPE DIEM workshops no computers were used until the storyboarding was agreed on and Salmon’s 5 stage model was integrated into the design development.

Table two: The Five Stage Model Salmon, (n.d.)

This approach was deemed successful via a survey which indicates increases in two project criteria: “instructional design/pedagogy” and “learning materials”. However,  some academics subsequently changed the courses when they discovered that they had failed to account for their own and student time.

4.3. The 7Cs of learning design

Grainne Conole ( n.d.) promotes The 7Cs of Learning Design Toolkit.    The toolkit is an integrated set of resources for learning design across disciplines. The 7Cs are: “conceptualise, capture, create, communicate, collaborate, consider and consolidate”. It aims, says Conole, to “enable the design of deep, engaging and enjoyable learning experiences for learners”.  The resources have been tested and many are taken from the CARPE DIEM project.

Table three: Conole’s 7cs of learning design adapted by Sandie Gray. Retrieved from http://joconlonoctel2013.wordpress.com/2013/05/22/conole-7cs-of-learning-design/

The 7cs model compares with the ADDIE model but uses a differently developed paradigm.

Table four: An comparison of the two models adapting Conole’s 7Cs model. Retrieved from: http://e4innovation.com/?p=616

http://jiscdesignstudio.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/60619333/OULDI_Pedagogic_Aspects_v8_Release.pdf

The use of the 7Cs model, Conole says leads from a belief based approach to a design based approach, encourages reflective practice and promotes sharing a discussion.

4.4. Universal Design for Learning

Steve Lowe (ShareFest,2013) discusses this concept. It’s a set of principles that addresses the needs of all learners – Planning for all Learners (PAL). “According to Rose and Meyer (2002), UDL is built on the premise that “barriers to learning occur in the interaction with the curriculum—they are not inherent solely in the capacity of the learner. Thus, when education fails, the curriculum, not the learner should take the responsibility for adaptation” (p. 20).” (As cited in Meo, n.d. p. 3).

UDL provides for:
1. multiple or flexible representations of information and concepts (the “what” of learning),
2. multiple or flexible options in expression and performance (the “how” of learning), and
3. multiple or flexible ways to engage learners in the curriculum (the “why” of learning; Rose & Meyer, 2002).” (ibid, p.3).

In essence this a team based approach that follows a kind of action research cycle:

From Meo, p 6.

4.5. Team based approaches

Like learning designs and approaches much is written about team-based approaches (Fenn, .n.d. Rahman, 2006; Sims & Jones, 2002) for designing courses and while a level of this seems to occur at WelTec it is not accepted practice, resulting in a feeling of diminished ownership by tutors and non-integrated programme development.

“(the model uses a)…..a team-based approach to the development process that encompasses regular and frequent communications and a commitment to maintaining a shared understanding of the development outcomes” (Sims & Jones, 2002).

The UDL process is essentially a team based approach where at each design step learning support and other experts address the needs of all learners.

4.6. Current situation Ed Tech Perspective

Learning design at WelTec appears to be unstructured in that ‘someone’ writes the programme documentation and the learning objectives, course hours etc.

The tutor or an appointed person in some schools then writes the course activities and outlines as well as I understand the assessments. The assessments are pre-delivery moderated and, according to various moderation plans. I am unclear at what stage learning support teams are included.

During the preparation of the documentation the Key Skills section of the programme documentation is completed however in some programme documents this is not. All programme documents include a graduate profile, learning assessment outlines and types, learning hours and high level activities.

The decision to ‘put the course online’ is often made after the course/programme has been designed.  Our role becomes one of moderating or suggesting subtle changes and managing layout.

The Ed Tech team uses a QA process based on the E-learning Guidelines and approved by the (then) Moodle Reference Group. This is intended to be a self-assessment task that we ask tutors to do preferable before their course go ‘live”. In practice  a member of the Ed Tech team completes this. While this process is useful for some tutors for self-reflection for others it is a pro forma task. The Ed Tech team see this as a way to enable reflection and to persuade tutors to ensure that student information is consistent across programmes so that students can use the Moodle site consistently and easily and that we meet our (unofficial) Accessibility and Usability Standards. 

The QA document/process looks at the usage of culturally appropriate words and case studies as well as how assessments are designed.

Ed Tech initiatives

As part of the Move to Moodle project the team developed an approach using an overview of how Moodle worked with an emphasis on pedagogy. This was designed to be used in teaching team sessions and to be followed up with small team and one-one sessions. 

The team found that where tutors attended the overview session they had a big picture approach to using the LMS which those who did not attend did not get. We also found, anecdotally that the teams who developed their ideas together developed online courses that met both the accessibility and usability guidelines and the QA checklist.

This approach used a catch phrase Communicate Integrate Activate to encourage staff to use the online tool as part of their teaching not an addition to. In one or two cases this approach was adopted but in general the LMS is seen as an adjunct and an extra to face to face teaching.

Recommendations

• That a team-based approach is developed at WelTec. This team would include members of the Academic Advisors team, the Capability development Team, learning support tutors course tutors and Ed Tech Team
  
  
• An agreed flexible model of learning design that focuses on the graduate profile, the course level, the course activities and the development of skills related to the graduate profile, as well as course content.
  
  
• That the ADDIE model be retained with a shared approach to learning design using a shared understanding of learning theories
  
  
• That a shared evaluation model be used and applied
  
  
• That the model used by Ed tech team in the Move to Moodle project be adapted and enlarged on the CARPE DIEM lines so that training and development occurs in line with learning design.

4.7. References

References  

Collom,  G., Dallas, A.,  Jong, R. &  and Obexer, R.  (2002). Six months in a leaky boat: Framing the knowledge and skills needed to teach well online. Ascilite conference, Auckland 8-11^th December, 2002.

Conole, G.  (n.d.) The 7cs of learning design toolkit. University of Leicester. Retrieved from http://www2.le.ac.uk/projects/oer/oers/beyond-distance-research-alliance/7Cs-toolkit

Conole, G. (n.d.) Update on the 7Cs of learning design. [blog post]. Retrieved from http://e4innovation.com/?p=616

Daretodifferentiate (n.d.) Universal design for Learning. [wiki]. Retrieved from http://daretodifferentiate.wikispaces.com/Universal+Design+for+Learning

Donald, Claire, Blake, Adam, Girault, Isabelle, Datt, Ashwini and Ramsay, Elizabeth(2009)'Approaches to learning

design: past the head and the hands to the HEART of the matter',Distance Education,30:2,179 — 199

Fenn, C. (n.d.). The University of Warwick: A team based approach to developing e-resources. Jisc infonet. [wiki]. Retrieved from https://jiscinfonetcasestudies.pbworks.com/w/tags/show?tag=staffpersonal/development

Harris,  R. A. & Schmoller, S. (December, 2011). Insight report: Contexts of use of learning design. [Discussion paper]. Inspire Research Ltd. Glasgow, U K. 

Hunt, K. & Moore, M. (2005). OTARA : An elearning  design framework. E-fest conference, Wellington, 2005.

Keller, J. M. (1987) Development and use of the ARCS Model of Instructional Design.  Journal of Instructional development.  September 1987, Vol. 10 Issue 3 pp. 2-10

Laurillard, D. &  and Ljubojevic, D. (2008). Evaluating learning designs through the formal representation of pedagogical patterns, London Knowledge Lab, UK, Retrieved from www.academia.edu.

Meo, G. (n.d.) Curriculum Planning for all learners. National Center for Universal Design. Retrieved from http://www.udlcenter.org/sites/udlcenter.org/files/CurriculumPlanningforAllLearners_0.pdf

Rahman, M.H. (2002). Developing course materials for open and distance learning: BOU perspective. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, July, 2006. V.1. No. 4). Retrieved from http://tojde.anadolu.edu.tr/tojde24/pdf/article_4.pdf

Salmon, G., Jones, S. & Armellini (2008) Building institutional capacity in e-learning design. ALT-J Research in Learning Technology, Vol. 16 No.2, June 2008, 95-109

Salmon, G. (n.d.)  The five stage model. Retrieved from http://www.gillysalmon.com/five-stage-model.html

Sims, R & Jones, D. (2002). Continuous improvement through shared understanding: Reconceptualising instructional design for online learning.  Ascilite conference, Auckland 8-11^th December, 2002.

 Waters, K.  (2007). What is Agile?  (10 key principles of Agile). Retrieved from: http://www.allaboutagile.com/what-is-agile-10-key-principles/