Views
5 months ago

Advances in E-learning-Experiences and Methodologies

RAPAD 2. An

RAPAD 2. An introduction to learning and the possible variations in and impact of cognitive styles, learning styles, and learning preferences on the learning process 3. Taking the cognitive profile tests, considering personal results (and being allowed to disagree with them—with the proviso of explaining why), discussing the results and commenting on them within the context of current individual conceptions of personal learning. 4. Producing a basic learning/personal Web site as part of the first assessment task (along with a written version of the previous activity). 5. Engagement with online learning resources from a variety of sources to consider personal preferences for learning tasks and activities (structure and form of educational materials, doing assignments, individual and collaborative learning, information retention, revising, etc.). 6. Doing a series of tutorial-based profile and design related tasks and producing an initial design document and series of draft screens for the PELE (second assessment task). 7. Discussing tutor feedback on the design document in group and individual scenarios. 8. Developing a series of personalised learning strategies for the degree course, the current year, a semester, a unit, an assignment, and considering how they might be integrated into the PELE. These strategies are seen as flexible and dynamic, to be adjusted according to varying constraints. 9. Developing, documenting (i.e., explaining the design with reference to one’s personal learning profile as part of the final assessment task), presenting, and receiving feedback on the actual Personalized E-Learning Environment. 10. Reflecting on the overall process, changing personal conceptions of individual learning, and integrating the new learning related knowledge and PELE into all learning activities. A version of the above scenario is presented in Table 1 as implemented for the Learning at University course. To summarize, a reflective and participatory approach to design is a developmental methodology which encourages reflection within the context of a participatory approach to design. In this case it is reflection by students on aspects of their own learning and participation in the process of the design and development of personalised e-learning environments. It is not assumed that students can easily or naturally contribute to the design and development process, so the concept of the cognitive profile has been introduced to help the process. A cognitive profile is considered to consist of measures of an individual’s cognitive style, learning style, and personality type. In terms of the design of a personalised e-learning environment, the term “reflective” is used as in Schön’s phrase “the reflective practitioner” (Schön, 1983). Participatory design is an approach to design which is not only user-centred (or learner-centred), but actively involves the user (student) in the design process. This is especially important where there is a large element of interaction between the user and the system being designed. One mechanism for doing this is student or user involvement in the design process, that is, a form of participatory design where students can draw on and develop their knowledge and understanding of how they learn within a framework and discourse provided by academic staff, university teachers, and student peers. the deveLoPment oF rAPAd There were four main phases in the development of RAPAD:

RAPAD 1. The initial development and formulation of ideas from observed teaching practice 2. A structured research study with Level 3 Human Computer Interaction students 3. The development and reformulation of ideas from 1 and 2 with post-graduate conversion students taking several iterations of an Information Systems Development course 4. The fourth phase saw RAPAD developed, restructured for less technologically experienced students, and used as the major part and focus of a unit entitled “Learning at University” for over 400 pre-university students. The four main phases are discussed in more detail. As with all dynamic user-centred methodologies, further use brings new developments and refinements. Phase 1: Initial Formulation of the need for Personalised e-Learning Environments The roots of the development of RAPAD lie in the period following the advent of the World Wide Web in the UK. In the mid 1990s, the Web and associated work-related factors initiated a process of thinking in a more structured manner about emerging themes and problems. The first of these was when I observed a personalized and individual interface (for a partially sighted student) in practice. The second was a concurrent period of major organizational change, not uncommon in modern higher education, which had a negative impact on the student using the personalized interface. Ideas concerning information overload and attempts to enable students to handle the ever-increasing availability of masses of relatively unstructured information were initially developed. Thoughts on interface preferences were further prompted when I supervised the above student taking a written exam with the specially constructed interface. Both of these reflective episodes occurred against the backdrop of a series of university reorganizations. The reorganizations reflected both social and technological changes in higher education and responses to government policy and suggested a need to rethink student learning support resources at a personal level. I explored some of these ideas in several of the courses I taught over the next few years. These included courses in Human Computer Interaction and Information Systems Design. One newly developed course allowed me to explore more of the cognitive and interface issues emerging with Internet and Web developments—Intelligent Interfaces for the Internet. Phase 2: Formal research Program A formal research program was designed to explore several of the questions raised by the experiences of the students and myself in the first phase. Curriculum and syllabus changes allowed the redesign of a human computer interaction course to integrate the cognitive and interface issues into the course material and assessment. The stated aim of the research was “to consider how cognitive profiles and a reflective and participatory approach to the design and development of a Web-based learning environment can be used to enable autonomous learning and help students interface with learning processes, materials, and environments” (Webster, 2005, p.3). Three well known and reliable measures, Riding’s Cognitive Styles Analysis (Riding & Rayner, 1998), Entwistle’s Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (Tait, Entwistle, & McCune, 1998), and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer, 1999) were used to develop the cognitive profile. Computer-based and self-report tests for each of the above measures were administered to a group of 64 students participating in a human computer interaction unit. The results of the tests were made available to the students within one week of each measure being administered. The students were

  • Page 2 and 3: Advances in E-Learning: Experiences
  • Page 4 and 5: Table of Contents Preface .........
  • Page 6 and 7: Chapter XIV Open Source LMS Customi
  • Page 8 and 9: Chapter III Philosophical and Epist
  • Page 10 and 11: of constructive and cooperative met
  • Page 12 and 13: Chapter XIV Open Source LMS Customi
  • Page 14 and 15: contents, learning contexts, proces
  • Page 16 and 17: xv these organizations do not get a
  • Page 18 and 19: xvii QuALIty In e-LeArnIng Before t
  • Page 20 and 21: allow that the teachers in training
  • Page 22 and 23: xxi ISO. (1986). Quality-Vocabulary
  • Page 24 and 25: Chapter I RAPAD: A Reflective and P
  • Page 26 and 27: RAPAD in fields such as law, engine
  • Page 28 and 29: RAPAD mystery to the new student. B
  • Page 30 and 31: RAPAD example, whereas Laurillard h
  • Page 32 and 33: RAPAD Ontologically, systems philos
  • Page 34 and 35: RAPAD information related processes
  • Page 36 and 37: RAPAD methods and techniques accord
  • Page 40 and 41: RAPAD then asked to reflect on and
  • Page 42 and 43: RAPAD Figure 4. A rich picture to h
  • Page 44 and 45: RAPAD Again using techniques from t
  • Page 46 and 47: RAPAD university preparation course
  • Page 48 and 49: RAPAD The third interface is at the
  • Page 50 and 51: RAPAD Knight, P.T., & Trowler, P. (
  • Page 52 and 53: RAPAD AddItIonAL reAdIngs Goodyear,
  • Page 54 and 55: A Heideggerian View on E-Learning t
  • Page 56 and 57: A Heideggerian View on E-Learning (
  • Page 58 and 59: A Heideggerian View on E-Learning s
  • Page 60 and 61: A Heideggerian View on E-Learning r
  • Page 62 and 63: A Heideggerian View on E-Learning o
  • Page 64 and 65: A Heideggerian View on E-Learning n
  • Page 66 and 67: A Heideggerian View on E-Learning M
  • Page 68 and 69: A Heideggerian View on E-Learning W
  • Page 70 and 71: Philisophical and Epistemological B
  • Page 72 and 73: Philisophical and Epistemological B
  • Page 74 and 75: Philisophical and Epistemological B
  • Page 76 and 77: Philisophical and Epistemological B
  • Page 78 and 79: Philisophical and Epistemological B
  • Page 80 and 81: Philisophical and Epistemological B
  • Page 82 and 83: Philisophical and Epistemological B
  • Page 84 and 85: Chapter IV E-Mentoring: An Extended
  • Page 86 and 87: E-Mentoring However, what is unders
  • Page 88 and 89:

    E-Mentoring baugh, & Williams, 2004

  • Page 90 and 91:

    E-Mentoring Table 2. Contact. Diffe

  • Page 92 and 93:

    E-Mentoring Table 10. Ethical impli

  • Page 94 and 95:

    E-Mentoring Table 15. Technology st

  • Page 96 and 97:

    E-Mentoring Table 21. Coaching. Bes

  • Page 98 and 99:

    E-Mentoring Table 27. Moment. Best

  • Page 100 and 101:

    E-Mentoring Moreover, existing rese

  • Page 102 and 103:

    E-Mentoring Kasprisin, C. A., Singl

  • Page 104 and 105:

    E-Mentoring Ensher, E. A., Heun, C.

  • Page 106 and 107:

    Chapter V Training Teachers for E-L

  • Page 108 and 109:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning FL

  • Page 110 and 111:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning ne

  • Page 112 and 113:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning A

  • Page 114 and 115:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning yo

  • Page 116 and 117:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning Di

  • Page 118 and 119:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning ht

  • Page 120 and 121:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 122 and 123:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 124 and 125:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 126 and 127:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 128 and 129:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 130 and 131:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 132 and 133:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 134 and 135:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 136 and 137:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 138 and 139:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 140 and 141:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 142 and 143:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 144 and 145:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 146 and 147:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 148 and 149:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 150 and 151:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 152 and 153:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 154 and 155:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 156 and 157:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 158 and 159:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 160 and 161:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 162 and 163:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 164 and 165:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 166 and 167:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 168 and 169:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 170 and 171:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 172 and 173:

    Chapter IX AI Techniques for Monito

  • Page 174 and 175:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 176 and 177:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 178 and 179:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 180 and 181:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 182 and 183:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 184 and 185:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 186 and 187:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 188 and 189:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 190 and 191:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 192 and 193:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 194 and 195:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 196 and 197:

    Chapter X Knowledge Discovery from

  • Page 198 and 199:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 200 and 201:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 202 and 203:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 204 and 205:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 206 and 207:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 208 and 209:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 210 and 211:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 212 and 213:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 214 and 215:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 216 and 217:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 218 and 219:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 220 and 221:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 222 and 223:

    Chapter XI Swarm-Based Techniques i

  • Page 224 and 225:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 226 and 227:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 228 and 229:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 230 and 231:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 232 and 233:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 234 and 235:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 236 and 237:

    Chapter XII E-Learning 2.0: The Lea

  • Page 238 and 239:

    E-Learning 2.0 Table 1. Different s

  • Page 240 and 241:

    E-Learning 2.0 Figure 1. Difference

  • Page 242 and 243:

    E-Learning 2.0 where the blog is al

  • Page 244 and 245:

    E-Learning 2.0 process. Along this

  • Page 246 and 247:

    E-Learning 2.0 forth, and, of cours

  • Page 248 and 249:

    E-Learning 2.0 Finally, it is impor

  • Page 250 and 251:

    E-Learning 2.0 never be a hotchpotc

  • Page 252 and 253:

    E-Learning 2.0 McPherson, K. (2006)

  • Page 254 and 255:

    E-Learning 2.0 Rosen, A. (2006). Te

  • Page 256 and 257:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 258 and 259:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 260 and 261:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 262 and 263:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 264 and 265:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 266 and 267:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 268 and 269:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 270 and 271:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 272 and 273:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 274 and 275:

    Open Source LMS Customization Intro

  • Page 276 and 277:

    Open Source LMS Customization or ev

  • Page 278 and 279:

    Open Source LMS Customization compa

  • Page 280 and 281:

    Open Source LMS Customization Figur

  • Page 282 and 283:

    Open Source LMS Customization Figur

  • Page 284 and 285:

    Open Source LMS Customization Figur

  • Page 286 and 287:

    Open Source LMS Customization Haina

  • Page 288 and 289:

    Evaluation and Effective Learning p

  • Page 290 and 291:

    Evaluation and Effective Learning r

  • Page 292 and 293:

    Evaluation and Effective Learning t

  • Page 294 and 295:

    Evaluation and Effective Learning p

  • Page 296 and 297:

    Evaluation and Effective Learning m

  • Page 298 and 299:

    Evaluation and Effective Learning c

  • Page 300 and 301:

    Evaluation and Effective Learning H

  • Page 302 and 303:

    Chapter XVI Formative Online Assess

  • Page 304 and 305:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 306 and 307:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 308 and 309:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 310 and 311:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 312 and 313:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 314 and 315:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 316 and 317:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 318 and 319:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 320 and 321:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 322 and 323:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 324 and 325:

    0 Chapter XVII Designing an Online

  • Page 326 and 327:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 328 and 329:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 330 and 331:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 332 and 333:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 334 and 335:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 336 and 337:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 338 and 339:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 340 and 341:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 342 and 343:

    Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator

  • Page 344 and 345:

    Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator

  • Page 346 and 347:

    Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator

  • Page 348 and 349:

    Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator

  • Page 350 and 351:

    Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator

  • Page 352 and 353:

    Chapter XIX E-QUAL: A Proposal to M

  • Page 354 and 355:

    E-QUAL is proposed to evaluate the

  • Page 356 and 357:

    E-QUAL provide competent, service-o

  • Page 358 and 359:

    E-QUAL 2004; Scalan, 2003) and qual

  • Page 360 and 361:

    E-QUAL benchmarks address technolog

  • Page 362 and 363:

    E-QUAL E-learning added two differe

  • Page 364 and 365:

    E-QUAL Table 6. Application of the

  • Page 366 and 367:

    E-QUAL Future trends The future of

  • Page 368 and 369:

    E-QUAL (EQO) co-located to the 4 th

  • Page 370 and 371:

    E-QUAL SMEs: An analysis of e-learn

  • Page 372 and 373:

    E-QUAL Meyer, K. A. (2002). Quality

  • Page 374 and 375:

    Compilation of References Argyris,

  • Page 376 and 377:

    Compilation of References Biggs, J.

  • Page 378 and 379:

    Compilation of References Cabero, J

  • Page 380 and 381:

    Compilation of References Comezaña

  • Page 382 and 383:

    Compilation of References Downes, S

  • Page 384 and 385:

    Compilation of References Fandos, M

  • Page 386 and 387:

    Compilation of References national

  • Page 388 and 389:

    Compilation of References Hudson, B

  • Page 390 and 391:

    Compilation of References Harbour.

  • Page 392 and 393:

    Compilation of References Little, J

  • Page 394 and 395:

    Compilation of References Metros, S

  • Page 396 and 397:

    Compilation of References ONeill, K

  • Page 398 and 399:

    Compilation of References Preece, J

  • Page 400 and 401:

    Compilation of References Sadler, D

  • Page 402 and 403:

    Compilation of References Shin, N.,

  • Page 404 and 405:

    Compilation of References tional Co

  • Page 406 and 407:

    Compilation of References Vermetten

  • Page 408 and 409:

    Compilation of References Yu, F. Y.

  • Page 410 and 411:

    About the Contributors Juan Pablo d

  • Page 412 and 413:

    About the Contributors part: “An

  • Page 414 and 415:

    About the Contributors María D. R-

  • Page 416 and 417:

    About the Contributors Applications

  • Page 418 and 419:

    Index e-learning tools, automated p

  • Page 420:

    Socrates 55 Sophists 55 student-foc

Non-inferiority trials: advances in concepts and methodology
TOP - IRC - ACT - Advanced Communication Technologies
The Quality Turn. Political and Methodological Challenges in ...
October 2007 Volume 10 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...
Advancing Collaborative Learning with ICT - The ICT Connection ...
Organizational Change Management Methodology
ADVANCES
ROI Methodology for e-Learning Courses - Cecoa
Mentor update2 - Advancing your mentoring role
Learn Hay Group's world renowned methodologies
MTM Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experience in Ambulatory Care
SPEAKING ORGANIZATIONS: - Advanced Learning Institute
INNOVATIVE LEARNING MODELS
Lexicon of Online and Distance Learning - PEEF's Digital Library
Download Methodology Report - Ministry of Fisheries
proceedings of Student Mobility and ICT: Can E-LEARNING
e-Learning for Lifelong Learning in Denmark
DIRECTOR OF UCL CENTRE FOR ADVANCEMENT OF LEARNING AND TEACHING ...
UNDERSTANDING PROJECT BASED LEARNING
Cameron final report 2009 - Office for Learning and Teaching
Advancing Agricultural Leadership on Sustainability
The Joy of Learning - ACT - Advanced Communication Technologies
Advanced Communication and Conflict - IneedCE.com
Methodology for Monitoring and Assessment of the Level of ...
Online Advanced Placement Courses - WICHE
Wellbeing and involvement; Experience Oriented Education ...