• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
 
Designing for Change:Mash-Up Personal Learning Environments
Fridolin Wild, Felix Mödritscher and Steinn SigurdarsonInstitute for Information Systems and New Media,Vienna University of Economics and Business AdministrationSummary
Institutionsforformaleducationandmostworkplacesareequippedtodaywithatleastsomekindof
tools 
thatbringtogether
people 
andcontent
artefacts 
inlearning
activities 
tosupporttheminconstructingandprocessinginformationandknowledge.Foralmosthalfacentury,scienceandpracticehavebeendiscussingmodelsonhowtobringpersonalisationthroughdigitalmeanstotheseenvironments.Learningenvironmentsandtheirconstructionaswellasmaintenancemakesupthemostcrucialpartofthelearningprocessandthedesiredlearningoutcomesandtheoriesshouldtakethisintoaccount.Instructionitselfasthepredominantparadigmhastostepdown.Thelearningenvironmentisan(ifnot‘the’)importantoutcomeofalearningprocess,notjustastagetoperforma‘learningplay’.Forthesegoodreasons,wethereforeconsiderinstructionaldesigntheoriestobeflawed.Inthisarticlewefirstclarifykeyconceptsandassumptionsforpersonalisedlearningenvironments. Afterwards,wesummariseourcritiqueonthecontemporarymodelsforpersonalisedadaptivelearning.Subsequently,weproposeouralternative,i.e.theconceptofamash-uppersonallearningenvironmentthatprovidesadaptationmechanismsforlearningenvironmentconstructionandmaintenance.Thewebapplicationmash-upsolutionallowslearnerstoreuseexisting(web-based)toolsplusservices.Ouralternative,LISLisadesignlanguagemodelforcreating,managing,maintaining,andlearningaboutlearningenvironmentdesign;itiscomplementedbyaproofofconcept,theMUPPLEplatform.Wedemonstratethisapproachwithaprototypicalimplementationanda–wethink–comprehensibleexample.Finally,weroundupthearticlewithadiscussiononpossibleextensionsofthisnewmodelandopenproblems.
Keywords:
PersonalisedLearning;Environments;Design,LISL,MUPPLEapproach
 
1 Introduction: Most Important Concepts, Key Arguments, Structure of the Article
Withinthisarticle,wearelookingbackatthishistoryofpersonalised,adaptivelearningtoformulateacritiqueonthecontemporarymodelsandtheories,whileatthesametimeproposinganewapproachwhichputslearnerscentrestageagain.Wewillarguethatthisapproachismoreapttoexplainadaptivepersonalisationintechnology-enhancedlearningandismorehelpfulinguiding(evenend-userdriven)engineeringandmaintenanceofpersonalisedlearningenvironments.TheapproachweproposehasbeendevelopedwithinthescopeoftheEuropeanISTproject‘iCamp’(Kieslingeretal.,2006).Inparticular,wearegoingtoshowthat
learningenvironmentdesign 
isthemissinglink,abletoavoidtheflawsofprioradaptationtheoriesintechnology-enhancedlearning.Thisisstronglybasedonthreeassumptions.
 
eLearning Papers • www.elearningpapers.eu •
1
 Nº 9 • July 2008 • ISSN 1887-1542
 
 
 
First,weassumethat
learningtolearn 
whileatthesametimelearningcontentisabetterapproachthanjust(re-)constructingdomain-specificknowledge.Inotherwords,webelievethattheacquisitionofsocial,self,andmethodologicalcompetence(i.e.transcompetences)priortoorinadditiontoprofessionalcompetenceissuperiortoonlyacquiringprofessionalcompetence(i.e.domain-specificskills,facts,rules,andthelike).Thisisnotonlyjustifiedthroughtheaddedvalue,butadditionallybythedecreasinghalf-lifeofprofessionalknowledge.Wedeliberatelysay‘constructing’asinconstructivisttheorya‘transfer’ofknowledgedoesnotexist:knowledgecanonlybecreatedfromwithinthemindsofthelearners,thoughofcourseinfluencedonsensoryexperiencesprovidedbytheirenvironment.Secondandconsequently,wepresupposethatestablishinga
learningenvironment 
,i.e.anetworkofpeople,artefacts,andtools(consciouslyorunconsciously)involvedinlearningactivities,ispartofthe
learningoutcomes 
,notaninstructionalcondition.Adaptationstrategiesgobeyondnavigationaladaptationthroughcontentartefactsalongapredefinedpath:forexample,somelearnersmayprefertoemailanexpertinsteadofreadinganonlinepaper.Adaptationhastotakeplacealongindividualisedactivitiesperformedintheseenvironments.Inherently,theselearningenvironmentsarealwaysnetworks:theyencompassactors,artefacts,andtoolsinvariouslocationswithheterogeneousaffiliations,purposes,styles,objectives,andthelike.Networkeffectsmakethenetworkexponentiallymorevaluablewithitsgrowingsize.Thirdandfinally,weconsider
emergence 
ofbehaviourasanunavoidableandnaturalphenomenonofcomplexnetworks.Byemergentbehaviourwemeanthattheobservabledynamicsshowsurprisingactivity,surprisinginsofarastheparticipatingsystemshavenotbeeninstructedtodoso(theymayevennothaveintendedit).Designingforemergenceisinourviewmorepowerfulthan‘programming’byrulesasthemodelsinvolvedaresimplerwhileachievingthesameeffect.Basedontheseassumptions,wearegoingtosketchanewmodelforpersonalisedadaptivelearningwhichstronglyfocusesonlearningenvironmentdesign.Wediscussrepresentationalaspectsofthismodelbyproposingalearninginteractionscriptinglanguagewithwhichenvironmentdesigncanbeformalised.Furthermore,wedemonstratethefeasibilityandillustrateourapproachwithtwoexamplesperformedwithourresearchprototype‘mupple’.Therestofthispaperisorganisedasfollows.First,wesummariseourcritiqueonthecontemporarymodelsforpersonalisedadaptivelearning.Then,weproposeouralternative,i.e.theconceptofamash-uppersonallearningenvironmentthatprovidesadaptationmechanismsforlearningenvironmentconstructionandmaintenance.Third,wedemonstrateourapproachwithaprototypicalimplementationanda–wethink–comprehensibleexample.Finally,weroundupthisarticlewithadiscussiononpossibleextensionsofthisnewmodeland(still)unresolvedproblems.
2 Personalisation: Why Instructional Design Theories Fail and Why Current AdaptationTechnologies are Defective by Design
Classically,thefieldofpersonalisedadaptivelearningbaseson
instructional design theories
andutilises
adaptive and intelligent technologies
forpersonalisation.
Instructional design theories
aimatofferingexplicitguidancetohelppeoplelearnbetterand,consequently,theytreatlearningenvironments(thetools!)asaninstructionalconditionandseparatefromthedesiredlearningoutcomes(cf.Reigeluth,1999).Eveninmoreconstructivistinstructionaltheories,thelearningenvironmentisassumedtobecreatedbyaninstructionaldesigner(Mayer,1999;Jonassen,1999).Inappliedresearch,thesedesigntheoriesappearintwodifferentflavours:withandwith-outastrongartificialintelligencecomponent.TheoriesincorporatingastrongAIviewpointareinherentlyill-definedastheyneedtotakeintoaccountallcontextvariablesthatmayinfluencethelearningprocessofthelearners.Investedinthisapproach,however,isanaiveobjectivistassumptionthatitispossibletocreateanomniscientartificialsystemwhichknowseverything(orinaweakerform‘everythingimportant’)aboutthecurrentcontextvariablesinfluencingalearnerinhisinformationprocessingandlearningwork.Thisisnot
 
eLearning Papers • www.elearningpapers.eu •
2
 Nº 9 • July 2008 • ISSN 1887-1542
 
 
 
possible.Learnersarenotsittinginaglass-boxwhereateachercanmonitorwhichWikipediapagestheyarereading,towhomtheyaretalkinginthehallways,andwhethertheirchildhoodexperiencesinfluencethemtopreferreadingtowatchingtelevision.Even
iff  
alearnerwouldhavelivedhiswholelifeinaglass-box,stillitwouldnotbepossibletodistinguishtherelevantfromtheirrelevantenvironmentalinfluencesandtheresultingrepresentationalmodel(s)wouldhavethesamecomplexityastheoriginallearner.Byitselfitalreadywouldrequireaninfiniteamountofadaptationwork,evengrowingexponentiallywiththenumberofpeopleparticipatinginalearningnetwork.Andstill–likeinSearle’sfamousChineseroom–,evenifasystemcouldnumber-crunchaproblemofthiscomplexity,itwouldnevertrulyunderstandwhatthelearneristhinking.Contemporaryinstructionaldesigntheories,however,haveabandonedthisgoalofastrongartificialintelligencemonitoringandguidingautomaticallyalongtimeago.Usually,theyforeseeamixtureofminorautomaticsystemadaptationsalongacoarse-graininstructionaldesignmasterplanengineeredbyateacherorinstructionaldesigner.So-called‘learningpaths’arefine-tunedalonglearnercharacteristicsanduserprofilestoconformtotrailsenvisioned,notnecessarilyprovenbyteachers.Therearetwogoodreasons,whytheseweakAItheorieshavetoberejected,whenappliedforpersonalisation.First(andlessimportant),thereisno‘perfect’instructionaldesigner:anenvironmentcanonlybeplannedfortheaveragelearner,nottheindividual.Evengoodinstructionaldesignershadtogaintheirexperience,hadtomakeerrorsinthepasttobuiltupeffectiveandefficientstrategies.Moreover,inpracticeinstructionaldesignersaremostoften‘only’domainexpertsforaparticularfieldofknowledge,nodidacticalexperts.Second(andmoreimportant),plannedadaptationtakesexperiencesawayfromthelearners:externalplanningkeepsthemfrombecomingcompetent,asittakeschancestoself-organiseawayandpersonaldiscoveryisprevented.Learners,however,arenotonlysense-makersinstructedbyteachersalongapredefinedpath.Learnersneedtoactivelyadapttheirlearningenvironmenttotheirneedssothattheycanconstructthecompetencesnecessaryforsuccessfullearning.Andfacilitatorscancoachthemonthisway.Thelearningenvironmentisan(ifnot‘the’)importantoutcomeofalearningprocess,notjustastagetoperforma‘learningplay’.Forthesegoodreasons,wethereforeconsiderinstructionaldesigntheoriestobeflawed.Learnersarenotpatientsthatneedanaptitudetreatment.Theyproactivelyhaveto(andofcoursealreadydo)takeaccountoftheirlearningenvironment.
Adaptation technologies
canvaryintheirdegreeofcontrol:howmuchareend-users(learners!)involvedinadaptation.Oppermann,Rashev,andKinshuk(1997)thereforedifferentiatebetweenadaptiveandadaptablesystemswithafluenttransgressionfromtheonetotheother.Systemsareconsideredtobeadaptableiftheusersinitiatetheadaptation(andviceversa).Similarly,Dologidentifiestwoperspectivesthroughwhichadaptationcanbeseen:adaptationscanbeperformedbyhumanstocopewithchangedrequirementsoftheparticipatingstakeholders.Alternatively,adaptationcanbeadynamicsystemadaptationtochangedparametersintheenvironmentorcontext(Dolog,2008).Threeimportantstreamsofresearchcanbeidentifiedasrelevantforpersonalisedadaptivelearning:technologiesfrom
adaptive(educational)hypermedia 
,
learningdesigntechnologies 
,and
adaptivehypermediagenerators 
.Onafinerlevel,
adaptiveandintelligenttechnologies 
canbedistinguishedintocurriculumsequencingandproblem-solvingsupporttechnologies(Brusilovsky,1999).Whereassequencingdealswithadaptingthenavigationalpaththroughpre-existinglearningmaterial,problem-solvingsupporttechnologiesdealwithevaluatingthestudentcreatedcontentrepresentationseithersummativelyor–ininteractivesupporttechnologies–formativelyevenduringthelearningprocessitselfthroughtheprovisionoffeedbackorbypresentationofrelatedexamples.Furthermore,inthemoregenericadaptivehypermediaarea,adaptivenavigationsupportandadaptivepresentationsupportcanbedistinguished(Brusilovsky,1999).Bothdealwithadaptingpre-existingcontent:navigationsupportwithpathandlinkadaptation(thoughinamoreopensetting–theweb),thelatterwiththepresentationofasubsetinnewarrangementsoftheavailablecontent.Additionally,athird
 
eLearning Papers • www.elearningpapers.eu •
3
 Nº 9 • July 2008 • ISSN 1887-1542
 
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...