ED-MEDIA 1999 Proceedings Book - Association for the ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Technology and institutional Task Support GSS External facilitator & email leaders Access to repository of std templates, group data, links with other applications e.g. Word or Excel. Specialised views and Database hierarchies. Database or email advice to groups and individuals Table 1 Domains and Mechanisms for GSS facilitation While the table shows some meaningful information, it does not provide a clear framework for understanding the facilitator role. For instance, the domain of individual’s actions, while implicit in each of the rows, is omitted, as is the area of relationships and specific support activities. Temporal Analysis of Mediating Activities and Relationships with GSS Facilitation In this next analysis a time dimension is included, and the four mediation activities of Orlikowski et al. (1995) are used to structure the comparison. Illustrative examples are again drawn from the collaborative trial. (Clear, 1999) Mediating Activity Meeting Phase Design Contingency Facilitator Actions Establishment Pre-Meeting Process Support Set up physical parameters and features of the technology Pre-Meeting & Process Modify institutional Meeting - Structure properties of the introductory (global) organization to facilitate technology assimilation Pre-Meeting & Meeting - introductory Reinforcement Meeting - exploration and development Meeting - closure Adjustment Meeting - exploration and development Meeting - closure Post meeting Meeting - exploration and development Meeting - closure Post meeting Episodic Change Process Support Process Structure Process Support Process Structure (internal) Task Support Task Structure Articulate the cognitive and behavioral routines through which the technology may be appropriated by users maintain the operational fidelity of the technology help users adopt and use appropriate cognitive and behavioral routines to use the technology Adjust technical features of the technology to promote use Alter usage rules and procedures to facilitate the use of the technology Post meeting Process Support Redesign the technical functions and features of the technology Post meeting Post meeting Process Structure Process Structure Modify institutional properties of the organization to facilitate change in technology use Redefine cognitive and behavioral routines to facilitate change in users appropriation of the technology Example Confirm resources (system capacity, technical support etc.) Organise creation of collaboration database and registration database for participants Establish collaboration parameters (scope, purpose, content, participants & timing with partnering institution’s facilitator) Confirm suitability of task Determine assessment regime Communicate intentions and obtain participants’ consent Ensure a match is made between the problem task, and the participants & facilitator’s skill levels Determine and communicate group numbers and membership Provide a clearly defined task or set of objectives and corresponding agenda Create and communicate an overview of the issue/problem (via facilitator at each site and posting instructions in database Advise process to register users Clarify roles and expectations Advise of help or other tutoring features available, such as guides, sample templates, naming standards etc. Check registration process, monitor entries, resolve access problems (forgotten passwords etc.). Check for activity level of participants, and resolve bugs, problems The GSS itself as facilitator (shaping of other user’s activities of use) - enabling participants to contribute freely Providing the participants with some form of control Facilitator promotes use of the GSS system Facilitator communicates and educates re. use of GSS If facilitator is a developer, may fine tune views, forms etc. to enhance usability Facilitator may advise technical support staff of problems needing attention (e.g. “out of file space” errors etc.) Facilitator may decide to deviate from plan of action and use different facilities of the GSS to support the meeting activity (e.g. attached files vs. document section entries) May advise new naming or other standards to enhance use May create new features e.g. on-line questionnaire for evaluations Facilitator as researcher may decide to recommend changes to clumsy or ineffective aspects of technology (e.g. upgrade views, redesign hierarchies that are too deep, improve navigation etc. Facilitator may recommend extensions or enhancements to GSS e.g. automatic links between registration and collaboration Databases to share email addresses within and between groups, or use of agents to link mail features more tightly with the GSS Determine a general ethical approval process for collaborations Set policy regarding summative vs. formative assessment in trials Streamline the process of establishing further collaborations, or extending the model to other courses Facilitator may decide to use different features of the technology for next collaboration (e.g. a ranking feature may be used to judge the merits of the design proposals submitted) Table 2 Temporal Analysis of Mediating Activities and Relationships with GSS Facilitation
From table 2 it can be seen that technology-use mediation does add to our understanding of the facilitation process, and can be incorporated into existing perspectives on the field of GSS and group facilitation. The Extended AST Model - Including GSS Facilitation Returning to the AST model, the above frameworks have suggested the value of technology-use mediation, but are relatively static as a base for further analysis. Given the inherently dynamic nature of the facilitation process, a model capable of reflecting that is required. The base AST constructs have been built upon to incorporate the technology-use mediation dimension. This now gives us an Extended AST Model, which includes technology-use mediation as a further source and form of structure within the model. At this stage the concept is generic, and could include other mediation roles such as systems administrators or designers, but the term technology-use mediator should be read to mean facilitator for the purposes of this paper. Structure of Advanced Information Technology * structural features restrictiveness level of sophistication comprehensiveness * spirit decision process leadership efficiency conflict management atmosphere Other Sources of Structure * task * organization environment * technology-use mediator (establishment & reinforcement) Group's Internal System * Styles of interacting * knowledge and experience with structures * perceptions of other's knowledge * agreement on appropriation P2 P1 Social Interaction Appropriation of Structures Decision Processes * Appropriation moves P5 * idea generation * faithfulness of appropriation * participation * instrumental uses * conflict management * persistent attitudes * influence behaviour toward appropriation * task management P3 Emergent Sources of Structure P6 * AIT outputs * task outputs * organization environment outputs * Technology-use mediator (adjustment) Decision outcomes * efficiency * quality * consensus * commitment P7 P4 New Social Structure * rules * resources * technology-use mediator (episodic) Figure 1 Summary of Major Constructs and Propositions of Extended AST Model [based upon figure 1 ex (DeSanctis & Poole, 1994)] The modified constructs are highlighted in the redrawn model (bold italics). Basically the three constructs dealing with sources and forms of structure have been augmented; • Other Sources of Structure • has had the technology-use mediator (facilitator) added, with the assumption that much of this intervention would occur during either the establishment or reinforcement modes of activity as shown in table 2 above • Emergent Sources of Structure • has had the technology-use mediator (facilitator) added, with the assumption that much of this intervention would occur during the adjustment mode of activity from table 2 • New Social Structure • has had the technology-use mediator (facilitator) added, with the assumption that much of this intervention would occur during the episodic mode of activity from table 2 Conclusions The complexities of developing new forms of collaborative electronic pedagogy defy simple analysis. The above model is an extension of a model developed to support research in the GSS field. It may be criticised for assuming that meetings result in decision outcomes. Nonetheless it allows for “meetings” to be broadly defined, and some aspects of the “outcomes” construct do apply to educational activities of this nature. Its strength lies in its ability to encompass the several dimensions at play in such learning environments. For instance in the Auckland-Uppsala trial several issues required attention. The collaborative task needed reconsideration, its scope was too ambitious in the time available and the degree of group interactivity demanded was too low. The process of establishing and assigning groups needs greater structure, probably through extra workflow features of the GSS. The organising elements and views of the database need simplification, and structures for reinforcing naming standards need to be more inbuilt than open to group selection. If anything the degree of genericity needs to be reduced and the application designed to more specifically suit the educational group collaborative context. The question of appropriation is an interesting one, given that half the groups were not faithful to the spirit of the groupware application, by choosing to use the more individualistic technology option of email. The extended AST model enables such issues to be discretely analysed in depth, but within a framework which does not omit the complex interaction effects. Initial uses of groupware for collaborative learning tend to occur at the intra-institution level (Siviter, Petre, Klein, 1997; Schrum 1997), but as interinstitutional collaborations grow, it becomes important that we find ways to increase their chances of success, and develop means to research the effectiveness of such learning practices. The author intends to continue a programme of international collaborative learning trials. This extended AST model may be one means of better designing such trials, while considering all the relevant dimensions. It may also prove a useful means to analyse the complex interactions of actors, institutional factors and technology in groupware supported collaborative learning contexts. Acknowledgements
Page 1 and 2:
Designing an Interactive Learning E
Page 3 and 4:
develop an educationally meaningful
Page 5 and 6: 2. Functionality of the BSCW System
Page 7 and 8: 3. First empirical findings During
Page 9 and 10: of the users as participating actor
Page 11 and 12: 2. Other Characteristics of the Pro
Page 13 and 14: education resources are being produ
Page 15 and 16: y using a drop-down menu: Informati
Page 17 and 18: Results Computing ability and expos
Page 19 and 20: instructional designs while introdu
Page 21 and 22: Global Educational Multimedia Serve
Page 23 and 24: Assured Access/Mobile Computing Ini
Page 25 and 26: The University has set up a secure
Page 27 and 28: * Changes in educational paradigms
Page 29 and 30: Using Computer Imagery and Visualis
Page 31 and 32: Publishing an imej Journal for Comp
Page 33 and 34: In summary, we offer the following
Page 35 and 36: Discussion Forums and Peer Review F
Page 37 and 38: Languages and Statistics: Solutions
Page 39 and 40: Kelly and Leckbee (1998) indicate,
Page 41 and 42: A Wide Array of Uses: Inquiry and I
Page 43 and 44: Effects of Question-Based Learning
Page 45 and 46: The EFFECTS of TRAINGING METHOD on
Page 47 and 48: 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY A 10-day ex
Page 49 and 50: prototype for futuristic learning e
Page 51 and 52: Designing a Course Web-Site to Supp
Page 53 and 54: International Collaborative Learnin
Page 55: Facilitation frameworks Bostrom et
Page 59 and 60: Learning in Safety and Comfort: Tow
Page 61 and 62: Networking The Nation Noel Craske S
Page 63 and 64: Norfolk Stations. Schools of Distan
Page 65 and 66: one-on-one with Teaching Assistants
Page 67 and 68: Java. One of them is already an exp
Page 69 and 70: • Personal study room management
Page 71 and 72: As has already been discussed in th
Page 73 and 74: On-line Support of On-Campus Educat
Page 75 and 76: In-service Teachers Teaching Pre-se
Page 77 and 78: How the Construction & Analysis of
Page 79 and 80: Yet, still we ask ourselves: How do
Page 81 and 82: us, we need to be ever-conscious of
Page 83 and 84: A Reporting Simulation Using Toolbo
Page 85 and 86: environment — it is impossible to
Page 87 and 88: Actually, when a particular author
Page 89 and 90: Any instance of this type is an HC
Page 91 and 92: Figure 5: Saving an Educational App
Page 93 and 94: To address this problem Webfuse dra
Page 95 and 96: Cognitive tools can act as structur
Page 97 and 98: In this study, we propose the follo
Page 99 and 100: more information about it, for exam
Page 101 and 102: Charlottesville, VA., 691-696. Muly
Page 103 and 104: ownership is retained by the instit
Page 105 and 106: priority, it is in the interests of
Page 107 and 108:
limitations of the prevailing compl
Page 109 and 110:
exchange information with other cla
Page 111 and 112:
whether compiled or interpreted. So
Page 113 and 114:
A web site system for instructors t
Page 115 and 116:
is to monitor the status of learner
Page 117 and 118:
the capability grant G13 as Not Set
Page 119 and 120:
Slavin R.(1994), Small group method
Page 121 and 122:
tutor. Support offered in the form
Page 123 and 124:
Apart from utilising the functional
Page 125 and 126:
Rogoff, B., & Lave, J. (Ed.). (1984
Page 127 and 128:
Java can significantly increase the
Page 129 and 130:
The modules are designed for a vari
Page 131 and 132:
adapted tests to assess the student
Page 133 and 134:
Architecture of HEZINET The system
Page 135 and 136:
Berners-Lee, T. & R. Cailliau, (198
Page 137 and 138:
The ParlEuNet system will provide a
Page 139 and 140:
3. Students use a dedicated HTML co
Page 141 and 142:
The prototype under development is
Page 143 and 144:
make an hypermedia educational envi
Page 145 and 146:
accreditation or standing in countr
Page 147 and 148:
A government designates a certain a
Page 149 and 150:
will be involved - either in partne
Page 151 and 152:
Streaming 7000 films... Uwe Sander
Page 153 and 154:
and how to innovate will be paramou
Page 155 and 156:
Toward a framework for instruction
Page 157 and 158:
A knowledge integration approach to
Page 159 and 160:
In 1978, the University formalized
Page 161 and 162:
comparisons to conventional instruc
Page 163 and 164:
Multimedia Cases in Teacher Educati
Page 165 and 166:
Merseth, K.K. (1996). Cases and cas
Page 167 and 168:
Using Multimedia to support mentors
Page 169 and 170:
Conclusion The project is still und
Page 171 and 172:
An Investigation into Faculty Attit
Page 173 and 174:
Web-Based Testing in Distance Educa
Page 175 and 176:
Selecting Internet Technologies to
Page 177 and 178:
Designing and Implementing Web-Base
show all

ED-MEDIA 1999 Proceedings Book - Association for the ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?