July 2007 Volume 10 Number 3 - Educational Technology & Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Paquette, G. (1999). Meta-knowledge representation for learning scenarios engineering. In S. Lajoie & M. Vivet (Eds.), Proceedings of AI-Ed ’99 in AI and Education: Open learning environments, Amsterdam: IOS Press. Paquette, G. (2002a). L’ingénierie pédagogique: Pour construire l’apprentissage en réseau. Montréal: Presses de l’Université du Québec. Paquette, G. (2002b). Modélisation des connaissances et des compétences, un langage graphique pour concevoir et apprendre. Montréal: Presses de l’Université du Québec. Paquette, G. (2002c). TeleLearning systems engineering: Towards a new ISD model. Journal of Structural Learning, 14, 1–35. Paquette, G. (2003). Instructional engineering for network-based learning, Pfeiffer/Wiley Publishing Co. Paquette, G., Crevier, F., & Aubin. C.(1994). ID knowledge in a course design workbench. Educational Technology, 34(9), 50–57. Paquette G., & Marino, O. (2005). Learning objects, collaborative learning designs and knowledge representation. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 3, 85–108. Paquette, G., Marino, O., De la Teja, I., Léonard, M., & Lundgren-Cayrol, K., (2005). Delivery of learning design: The Explor@ System’s case. In R. Koper & C. Tattersall (Eds.), Learning Design: A Handbook on Modelling and Delivering Networked Education and Training (pp. 311–326), Berlin: Springer Verlag. Paquette, G., & Rosca, I. (2004). An ontology-based referencing of actors, operations and resources in eLearning systems. SW-EL 2004 Workshop, August 23, 2004, Eindhoven, The Netherlands Pitrat, J. (1991). Métaconnaissance, avenir de l’Intelligence Artificielle, Paris: Hermès. Polya, G. (1957). Comment poser et résoudre un problème? Paris: Dunod. Popper, K. R. (1967). The logic of scientific discovery, New York, NY: Harper Torchbooks. Reigeluth, C. (1983). Instructional theories in action: Lessons illustrating selected theories and models, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. Romiszowski, A. J. (1981). Designing instructional systems, New York, NY: Nichols Publishing. Ruelland, D., Brisebois A., & Paquette, G. (2005). Supporting self-assessment in a competency approach to learning, E-Learn 2005 Conference, October 15-19, 2005, Vancouver, BC, Canada. Schreiber, G., Wielinga, B., & Breuker, J. (1993) KADS: A principled approach to knowledge-based system Development, San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Steels, L. (1990). Components of Expertise. AI Magazine, 11(2), 30-49. Thayse, A. (1988). Approche logique de l’intelligence artificielle, Paris: Dunod. W3C (2004). OWL Overview Document, Retrieved June 7, 2007, from, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owlfeatures-20040210/. 21
Ainsworth, S. (2007). Using a Single Authoring Environment across the Lifespan of Learning. Educational Technology & Society, 10 (3), 22-31. Using a Single Authoring Environment across the Lifespan of Learning Shaaron Ainsworth School of Psychology and Learning Sciences Research Institute, University of Nottingham, UK Tel: +44 115 9515315 // Fax: +44 115 9515324 // Email: Shaaron.Ainsworth@nottingham.ac.uk ABSTRACT For a single authoring environment to be sufficiently general to be applicable to contexts across the whole lifespan of learning, some of the benefits that come from knowledge-rich domain specificity have to be sacrificed. Consequently, it is an open question as to whether it is possible to achieve effective learning environments from a generic tool. REDEEM is an authoring environment that aims to achieve this by creating adapted and interactive learning environments from existing courseware. In this paper, a 10-year research program is described that has assessed the usability, functionality, and effectiveness of REDEEM’s approach. Keywords Authoring environments, Evaluation, Usability, Pedagogy, Learning outcomes Introduction The goal of authoring environments is to make the creation of effective learning material easier. This could have a range of benefits: for example, authors without technical skills but with relevant pedagogical knowledge could create learning environments; the time taken to create learning environments could be reduced (as creation of learning environments is variously estimated at between 200 and 1000 hours per hour of learning); learners and authors could benefit from consistent interfaces across a wide range of courses; and good practice could be supported by providing tools that encourage (or enforce) specific designs. To achieve these benefits for authors and learners, it is apparent that the authoring tool must be sufficiently general to adapt to different domains and potentially different types of learners. And this raises a problem. Typically authoring tools that are the most generic are only capable of creating learning environments with the least depth of knowledge and power (Murray, 1996; 2003). Consequently different authoring environments have taken different positions of the generality/depth continua. A system such as the LEAP Authoring Tool (Sparks, Dooley, Meiskey, & Blumenthal, 2003) is very specialized. Its purpose is to create material to train telephone operators to handle customer requests over the telephone. As a consequence of this domain specificity, however, the system can rely upon conversation grammars. These contain a description of all the individual actions that the actors in the conversation may take, as well as hints for each step of the conversation, and audio recordings and textual representations of actions. DIAG (Towne, 2003) is another specialized authoring system, this time for fault finding and diagnosis. It does not solely rely on general troubleshooting principles but instead uses domain-specific reasoning to monitor students’ undertaking fault diagnosis on specific simulated equipment, demonstrating and explaining expert performance. Aleven et al. (2006) discuss the CTAT authoring system. A powerful authoring tool is available for authors with artificial intelligence programming skills, but for those without such knowledge, simpler intelligent tutoring systems can be built where authors create user interfaces by direct manipulation and then use a behavior recorder tool to demonstrate alternative correct and incorrect actions. Other authoring tools such as RIDES (Munro, 2003) and SIMQUEST (van Joolingen & De Jong, 2003) create powerful simulations to support discovery learning and guided practice. In contrast, the authoring environment described in this paper (REDEEM) takes the opposite position of the generality/depth continua. REDEEM has shallow depth of knowledge and has only a limited range of tutoring actions, but can be applied in a very time-efficient manner to many different domains and learners. It remains, therefore, an open question: Can a single authoring environment that is sufficiently general to adapt to contexts across the whole lifespan of learning still have sufficient power to deliver effective learning experiences? Consequently, in the remainder of this paper, a brief system description will be provided (see Ainsworth, et al., 2003, for more details) and then the 10-year research program with REDEEM will be reviewed to examine the strengths and the weaknesses of taking this approach to lifelong learning. ISSN 1436-4522 (online) and 1176-3647 (print). © International Forum of Educational Technology & Society (IFETS). The authors and the forum jointly retain the copyright of the articles. Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than IFETS must be honoured. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers, or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from the editors at kinshuk@ieee.org. 22
Page 1 and 2: July 2007 Volume 10 Number 3
Page 3 and 4: Advertisements Educational Technolo
Page 5 and 6: Distinguishing between games and si
Page 7 and 8: “sometimes” is less demanding t
Page 9 and 10: Figure 2. From generic skill to lea
Page 11 and 12: The large window on the left presen
Page 13 and 14: define competencies of individual a
Page 15 and 16: competency is composed of a single
Page 17 and 18: Generic Skills Classes 1 2 3 Receiv
Page 19 and 20: Figure 6. Extension of the competen
Page 21 and 22: Competency scale By combining the g
Page 23 and 24: activities, and resources present i
Page 25: Conclusion The importance given to
Page 29 and 30: different instruction. For example,
Page 31 and 32: Author-focused studies Studies 1 an
Page 33 and 34: egression showed that students were
Page 35 and 36: REDEEM is now a senior citizen in t
Page 37 and 38: Chieu, V. M. (2007). An Operational
Page 39 and 40: When students discuss with peers, t
Page 41 and 42: COFALE as a learning environment an
Page 43 and 44: COFALE supports a set of predefined
Page 45 and 46: Tom is asked to prepare a list of g
Page 47 and 48: 45-minute-long lecture and 2-hour-l
Page 49 and 50: as an easy-to-use technological mea
Page 51 and 52: Spiro, R. J., & Jehng, J. C. (1990)
Page 53 and 54: learning settings. However, such a
Page 55 and 56: introduced in the LOCO-Cite ontolog
Page 57 and 58: ‘virtual subsection’) of the LO
Page 59 and 60: Accordingly, TANGRAM provides stude
Page 61 and 62: learning environment is to define t
Page 63 and 64: Acknowledgment This work is support
Page 65 and 66: Dron, J. (2007). Designing the Unde
Page 67 and 68: wikis and blogs (or at least, colle
Page 69 and 70: The darker side of social software
Page 71 and 72: for the beetles, whose guts act as
Page 73 and 74: The principle of sociability The pr
Page 75 and 76: Bonabeau, E., Dorigo, M., & Theraul
Page 77 and 78:
Klamma, R., Chatti, M. A., Duval, E
Page 79 and 80:
We perceive adaptivity and personal
Page 81 and 82:
Mixed-method evaluation approach tr
Page 83 and 84:
Garden of Knowledge - with a commun
Page 85 and 86:
equirements for collaborative adapt
Page 87 and 88:
Law, E. L.-C., & Hvannberg, E. T. (
Page 89 and 90:
Wang, T. I., Tsai, K. H., Lee, M. C
Page 91 and 92:
2.3 Recommendation Model Survey In
Page 93 and 94:
Figure 1. The portion of the concep
Page 95 and 96:
STEP4: Associated with concepts in
Page 97 and 98:
A modified TF-IDF approach is used
Page 99 and 100:
P(CK j x LOM ) = k NW max ∀ T∈
Page 101 and 102:
4.2.2 Correlation-based algorithm I
Page 103 and 104:
content feedback, it can be intuiti
Page 105 and 106:
66% improvement in average, and, wh
Page 107 and 108:
(a) (b) (c) Figure 10. Comparisons
Page 109 and 110:
index.aspx. ADL-2 (2001). Advanced
Page 111 and 112:
Wolpers, M., Najjar, J., Verbert, K
Page 113 and 114:
activity is taking place. For examp
Page 115 and 116:
Figure 2: The CAM schema elements (
Page 117 and 118:
• Context: the context element ca
Page 119 and 120:
4.1 Generation of Attention Metadat
Page 121 and 122:
addition, such keywords can be extr
Page 123 and 124:
Action related data, data about sea
Page 125 and 126:
Braun, S., & Schmidt, A. (2006). Do
Page 127 and 128:
El-Bishouty, M. M., Ogata, H., & Ya
Page 129 and 130:
collaboration (Ogata, et al., 1999)
Page 131 and 132:
In case of LOI value is equal or cl
Page 133 and 134:
Also, the learner can click on an e
Page 135 and 136:
System Evaluation An experiment was
Page 137 and 138:
In the fifth phase, 89% of the stud
Page 139 and 140:
Fischer, G., & Konomi, S. (2005). I
Page 141 and 142:
application for specific needs, whi
Page 143 and 144:
(4) Multimedia: The truth is that e
Page 145 and 146:
Program Company Price OS 6 eZediaMX
Page 147 and 148:
Program Text editor Text import for
Page 149 and 150:
Program Sound Formats Image Formats
Page 151 and 152:
Program Image Painting Export Scrip
Page 153 and 154:
Program Effects Needs player 5 Easy
Page 155 and 156:
Program WYSIWYG Design Interactivit
Page 157 and 158:
the grades awarded to the programs
Page 159 and 160:
Grade Image formats Sound formats V
Page 161 and 162:
Figure 3. Adequacy of image formats
Page 163 and 164:
Animating objects, pictures, etc.,
Page 165 and 166:
Educational overview Having taken m
Page 167 and 168:
In summary, the final outcome is th
Page 169 and 170:
Developing the Interactivity Survey
Page 171 and 172:
technique. be treated as a desired
Page 173 and 174:
55. A lecture in which student lear
Page 175 and 176:
specific conclusions that researche
Page 177 and 178:
Discussion and conclusion Although
Page 179 and 180:
Juwah, C. (2003). Using peer assess
Page 181 and 182:
Publish results Set a few goals for
Page 183 and 184:
familiarity with computer terms, ex
Page 185 and 186:
provide a framework for the integra
Page 187 and 188:
tool themselves, and then gauge its
Page 189 and 190:
associated with the effective use o
Page 191 and 192:
portrayed as even more time-consumi
Page 193 and 194:
Clarke, B. (2001). Corporate curric
Page 195 and 196:
Neal, E. (1998). Using technology i
Page 197 and 198:
Yearwood, J., & Stranieri, A. (2007
Page 199 and 200:
entertaining (Neuhauser 1993). The
Page 201 and 202:
in being addressed with the sequent
Page 203 and 204:
The GAAM represents reasoning to a
Page 205 and 206:
Other situations have more serious
Page 207 and 208:
Figure 6. NARRATE phase screen afte
Page 209 and 210:
The narration at Step 10 informs th
Page 211 and 212:
very large degree of free-will has
Page 213 and 214:
Rumelhart, D. E. (1975). Notes on a
Page 215 and 216:
The School of Business at Universit
Page 217 and 218:
Authentic assessment and OBOW exams
Page 219 and 220:
iii. The assessment asks the studen
Page 221 and 222:
world problems in relation to the s
Page 223 and 224:
Herrington, J., & Herrington, A. (1
Page 225 and 226:
services required by most clients i
Page 227 and 228:
Wisdom. J. P., White, N., Goldsmith
Page 229 and 230:
Work outside the U.S. has also prom
Page 231 and 232:
of the Telecommunication Act, and t
Page 233 and 234:
Parent-advocate respondents also re
Page 235 and 236:
school administrators may be persua
Page 237 and 238:
of legal requirements for accessibl
Page 239 and 240:
Thus, while we have reason to belie
Page 241 and 242:
underlying structure of the two pri
Page 243 and 244:
still not familiar with its use; in
Page 245 and 246:
Table 3: An Analysis of Different V
Page 247 and 248:
of males. Secondly, as far as age w
Page 249 and 250:
Conclusion This study examined the
Page 251 and 252:
Sandholtz, J. H., Ringstaff, C., &
Page 253 and 254:
The design and validation of a text
Page 255 and 256:
Predetermined goal of a game The pr
Page 257 and 258:
A true, precise and valid model “
Page 259 and 260:
Bain, C., & Newton, C. (2003). Art
Page 261 and 262:
Prensky, M. (2005). Adopt and Adapt
Page 263 and 264:
opportunities based on studying dif
Page 265 and 266:
The game -called Chase the Cheese-
Page 267 and 268:
another token. Other tokens further
Page 269 and 270:
The system is organized in differen
Page 271 and 272:
“to produce a single product or p
Page 273 and 274:
(e.g., cheese) or loses the game (a
Page 275 and 276:
collaboration is not an easy task.
Page 277 and 278:
Collazos, C., Ortega, M., Bravo, C.
Page 279 and 280:
Soller, A., & Lesgold, A. (2000). K
Page 281 and 282:
Is the usual hierarchical organizat
Page 283 and 284:
The final step 7 in the procedure i
Page 285 and 286:
This methodology is summarised in F
Page 287 and 288:
‘IsBasisOf’, ‘HasConstraint
Page 289 and 290:
The presented results are a reflect
Page 291 and 292:
‘HasExample’, and ‘HasFurther
Page 293 and 294:
DCMI (2003). DCMI Metadata Terms, R
Page 295 and 296:
Literature review Astronomy educati
Page 297 and 298:
Systems of type I provide different
Page 299 and 300:
night. To prevent students from get
Page 301 and 302:
Figures 2-5 display screenshots of
Page 303 and 304:
Results of the study reveal the imp
Page 305 and 306:
vertical axis leads to the disappea
Page 307 and 308:
Dede, C., Salzman, M., Loftin, R. B
Page 309 and 310:
Trumper, R. (2000). University stud
Page 311 and 312:
ased on pre-defined adaptation rule
Page 313 and 314:
Therefore, the higher-level items o
Page 315 and 316:
common prefix with the existing pa
Page 317 and 318:
later should be omitted (presented
Page 319 and 320:
5.1 The Average Length of each Sequ
Page 321 and 322:
Recall 6. Discussion 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.
Page 323 and 324:
easily take lessons in a good learn
Page 325 and 326:
Laborda, J. G., & Royo, T. M. (2007
Page 327 and 328:
Chapter 8, Online reference tools,
Page 329 and 330:
Kenyon, D. M., & Malabonga, V. (200
Page 331 and 332:
and concise manner (e.g. Weeding =
Page 333:
stream are chapters 7 and 8 which f
show all

July 2007 Volume 10 Number 3 - Educational Technology & Society

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?