Learning Design The International Standard for CALL Don

Learning Design: The International Standard for CALL? Don Hinkelman University of Melbourne, School of Languages 札幌学院大学人文学英語英米文学科 , 2006. 04 Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4

Outline 1. Problem: Why are standards needed? 2. Issues: What kind of standard is best? § Depending on Theoretical Stance § Depending on Methodological Approach § Depending on Technological Trends § Depends on Development Ideology 3. Study: Does Learning Design fit CALL? § Case Study of an Open-source LMS Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 2

Part 1: Problem 1. Process: Software does not move from one site to another. Need to re-program. How do we interchange software and activities (process)? 2. Content: Content does not move easily from site to site. How do we interchange content? Not: “what is a single pattern for all CALL software? But: “how do we ensure interoperability(portability)? Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 3

Common Standards Currently Used by CALL Teachers . html. xml. jpg. ppt　. doc. xls. php Yet all are single file standards. To exchange a full learning scenario involves a complexity of multiple files, multiple activities, multiple people & venues Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 4

Interoperability Standards for Macro-level Files Needs to include: Whole courses in an LMS Units of Learning (UOL) fixed sequences of activities flexible sequences of activities Single activities [a. k. a. learning objects] Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 5

Interoperability Standards for Macro-level Files Some Teacher Authoring Requirements: Granularity: ability to break down whole course into parts Composition: ability to combine parts into a course Editable, Arrangable: reorder, reedit, sequence Sequencing Multiple Paths Multiple Groups & Roles Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 6

IMS-Learning Design An international standard SCORM IEEE IMS Only standard devoted to collaborative learning Inclusive of solitary, and fixed sequence learning scenarios, blended learning Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 7

IMS-Learning Design Technical Specifications XML “wrapper” standard nomenclature for describing activities and process can be pre-specified, or post-harvested intended for all learning scenarios, commercial or proprietary, blended or nonblended Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 8

Part 2: Issues 1. Problem: Why are standards needed? 2. Issues: What kind of standard is best? § § Depends on Theoretical Stance Depends on Methodological Approach Depends on Technological Trends Depends on Development Ideology 3. Study: Does Learning Design fit CALL? § Case Study of an Hinkelman, JALTCALL LMS Don Open-source 2006. 6. 4 9

a. Theoretical Stance What is your core stance on learning? Learning is solitary Learning is collaborative Let us look at some theories of second language learning Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 10

Theories of Second Language Learning Second Language Instruction (SLI) Second Language Acquisition (SLA) Second Language Socialisation (SLS) Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 11

Theory of SLI 　　　　　　ごしどう Second Language Instruction (SLI) 　第二言語指導 Based on linguistics A second language is learned best by learning the grammatical rules and vocabulary of the language. It is instructed in school classrooms or on self-study materials. Researchers analyze the language by dividing it into smaller bits (reductionism). Teaching is by putting these small pieces in a logical order. Sentences, words and phrases are focused on. Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 12

Model of SLI Grammar Progression Present Tense Past Tense Present Perfect Tense And so on Vocabulary Progression Basic Words Intermediate Words Advanced Words Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 And so on 13

Theory of SLA しゅうとく Second Language Acquisition (SLA) 　　第二言語習得 Theory from psychology A second language is learned best by following the natural pattern of developing a language in the brain It is “acquired”, not instructed, in both the real world and through classroom study or self-study. Researchers analyze the stages that learners pick up a language (interlanguage). Researchers look at mental processes. Teaching is by paying attention to the natural order of acquisition. Students should focus on good learning strategies, not the structure & meaning of a language. Communicative discourse is more important than sentence structure. Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 14

Model of SLA Information processing metaphor Inputs Processing Output Books Teaching Student Essays Speeches Test Answers Media Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 15

Theory of SLS 　　しゃかいか Second Language Socialisation (SLS) 　第二言語の社会 化 Influenced by sociology/anthropology/ecology A second language is learned best by joining a community that uses that language for specific purposes. It happens through purposeful projects and tasks inside that community. Researchers analyze the language acts and how veterans teach apprentices to do those jobs. Teaching is by designing and facilitating a community that is full of real-life projects for students to do. Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 16 PPAARR 2006. 6. 4

Model of SLS Ecological/Environmental metaphor Kramsch (2002), Van Lier (2001, 2005) Learning Community NS NS NS OV T=Teacher NS NS=Novice VS=Veteran Student SS NS NS NS SS NS VS T VS NS NS OV=Outside Veteran SS SS SS NS SS SS=Sister School NS OB/OG=Alumni NS VS VS NS T OV NS NS OB NS Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 17

Learning is solitary Standards which fit this model of reality SCORM 1. 3 IMS-SS Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 18

Learning is collaborative Standards which fit this model of reality None Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 19

Learning is collaborative & solitary Standards which fit this model of reality IMS-LD Evolved from EML (Educational Modeling Language) of Open University NL Incorporates solitary and collaborative learning in sequences of activities Incorporates face-to-face and online learning (blended scenarios) Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 20

b. Methodological Approach Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 21

Key Concepts Technology: electronic, architectural, paper forms, portfolios, media, web interfaces and other non-human actors in the learning process “materialist semiotic view” Design: continuous planning, redesign, improvisations, and refinements of pedagogy “translation/transformation view” Blended: hybrid forms of human/technology/curriculum/methods/space Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 22 s 2006. 6. 4

Core Conceptual Change CALL as a package Client-based Proprietary code Licensed content Single-user learning CALL as an environment Web-based Swappable scripts Shared content Collaborative learning Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 23

Trends of Blended Learning Theoretical Changes instruction >> acquisition >> socialisation Methodological Changes drill training >> project-based learning Technical Changes laboratories >> wireless rooms CD software >> web software Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 24

c. Technological Trends web based software (not standalone) modules and scripts (not packages) teacher-based design (not professional specialists) drag-and-drop interfaces (Flash, Red 5) reconfigurable sequences (de/reconstruction) rewriting/reformatting of authored content reuse of learner content granularization of roles and permissions Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 25 2006. 6. 4

d. Development Ideology Choices for teachers and developers Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 26

Part 3: Study Problem: Why are standards needed? 2. Issues: What kind of standard is best? § Depending on Theoretical Stance § Depending on Methodological Approach § Depending on Technological Trends § Depends on Development Ideology 1. 3. Study: Does Learning Design fit CALL? § Case Study of an Open-source Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL LMS 2006. 6. 4 27

Learning Design Study Group moodle. org Renamed to Technology and Pedagogy Study Group Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 29

Key Text Learning Design Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 30

Key Text "Learning Design: A Handbook on Modelling and Delivering Networked Education and Training" Edited by Rob Koper and Colin Tattersall Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 31

What is Learning Design? Learning Design (LD) is an international standard for modeling flexible sequences of educational activities. It applies not only to online network-based teaching but also classroom-based or blended learning as well. Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 32

Why use LD for CALL? IMS-LD is perhaps the only standard now proposed that allows for collaborative, socioconstructivist-oriented learning in a variety of formats. Yet, it is a “Proposed” standard in that little software actually uses it. Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 33

Studying Learning Design A working group at moodle. org community held a collaborative study course to analyze LD and its potential for integration with Moodle during the spring and summer of 2005. That group produced a paper which was published in August 2005. Journal: Journal of Interactive Media in Education Title: Practical and Pedagogical Issues for Teacher Adoption of IMS Learning Design Standards in Moodle LMS Authors: A. Berggren, D. Burgos, J. M. Fontana, D. Hinkelman, V. Hung, A. Hursh, G. Tielemans Available at: http: //jime. open. ac. uk/2005/02/ Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 34

Research Team Anders Breggren IKT-Pedagogen E-learning Consultancy, Sweden Daniel Burgos UNFOLD Project, Open University, Netherlands Josep Fontana Faculty of Translation, Universitat Pompeu Fabr, Spain Don Hinkelman (Facilitator, Editor) Horwood Language Centre, University of Melbourne, Australia Vu Hung Ministry of Education and Training, Vietnam Tony Husch Dept. of Educ. Psych. , University of Illinois, USA Ger Tielemans Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL Stedelijk Lyceum, Twente 2006. 6. 4 University, Netherlands 35

Case Study Conclusions LD does not have flexible authoring engines LD is not an environment (not LMS) LD exchanges learning sequences from LMS to LMS LD can take snapshots of a learning process at various points in time. Can record the cumulative process. LD is not necessary for teachers to understand. Simply, it is a requirement for any LMS--open source or proprietary. Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 36

Core Issue Does IMS-Learning Design handle “bricolage” design? Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 37

Conclusion: Does LD fit CALL? No: if your conditions are as follows Theory of learning: solitary, SLI, SLA Method of learning: content dissemination Technological base: broadcast/delivery mode Development ideology: proprietary, private licensing Better Standards: IMS-Simple Sequencing, SCORM 1. 2, 1. 3 Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 38

Conclusion: Does LD fit CALL? Yes: if your conditions are as follows Theory of learning: solitary & collaborative, SLS Method of learning: project-based learning multiple learning paths collaborative, group learning Technological base: networked, blended learning Development ideology: open source, public licensing Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 39

Future LD-compliant project-based language learning module to an open-source learning management system Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 40

Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 41

Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 42

Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 43

Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 44

Refined Problem How and when do teachers use technology? …use the internet? Why do they choose some technology and not others? What factors? How do they blend face-to-face technologies and online technologies? Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 45

What is a purpose? Not practice for later “real-life” Learning happens through doing something with real purpose, that secondarily uses a second language (not native language). Some examples: holding a conference (in a foreign language) producing a magazine (in a foreign language) hosting a visitor (in a foreign language) going on a study tour (in a foreign language) doing a fashion show (in a foreign language) planting trees Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL with a sister school (in a foreign…)46 2006. 6. 4

What is a community? A group with a purpose Veterans/Permanent members (veterans) Teachers Older students Alumni (OB, OG) Non-school community members Apprentices/Transitory members (apprentices) Beginning students Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 47

Part II: Trend of Blended Learning Theoretical Changes instruction >> acquisition >> socialisation Methodological Changes drill training >> project-based learning Technical Changes laboratories >> wireless rooms CD software >> web software Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 48

What is a project? A project is: a job that needs to be done. a classroom task that is related to a larger group effort Some examples at SGU: Korean exchange programs (hosting, visiting, organising) Email exchange programs Teaching practice, counseling practice Bunkyodai Shogakko/Melbourne Primary School exchange Homestay introduction letters (before going abroad) Interviewing foreigners/international students in Sapporo Powerpoint presentation forums Mini-Drama Happyokai JALTCALL Don Hinkelman, 49 2006. 6. 4

History of Approaches and Foci in Second Language Pedagogy Pre-1970 s-1990 s Post-1990 s Reductionism Constructivism Connectionism Dominant Theory Structural Cognitive Sociocultural Dominant Metaphor Instruction Acquisition Socialisation Research Unit of Analysis Sentence Discourse Actions, Effects Role of Learner Imitator Processor Apprentice Accuracy & Fluency Skill & Strategy Participation & Use Pedagogical Technique Error-correction Consciousness-raising Project-creation Pedagogic Assessment Proficiency Competency Fulfillment Native Production Global Proficiency Local Accomplishment Design World Drill Task Environment/Community Design Models Fixed, Rule-based Linear, Input-Output Ecological, Semiotic Philosophical Perspective Pedagogical Goals Pedagogic Success Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 50

Part II: Trend of Blended Learning Theoretical Changes instruction >> acquisition >> socialisation Methodological Changes drill training >> project-based learning Technical Changes Software: client software >> web software Hardware: laboratories >> wireless rooms Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 51

Web Software: Towards Community Connectionism Three Types of Web Software Static Example: HTML text/image page Communicative process: computer to students Dynamic/Interactive Example: Buttons, Paths, Quiz Communicative process: between computer/student Networked (Shared Database) Example: Community portal Communicative process: student to student Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 52

Community Portals Open Source Allows cross-university collaboration Allows customisation Allows creative module building Can integrate *all* language learning software Low cost Not “Moodle”, but… Cross-platform, open-source, language-learning community-building, class-administrative space Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 53

Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 54

Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 55

Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 56

Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 57

Kanda University of International Studies Blended Learning Classrooms Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 58

Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 59

Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 60

Wireless Campus What is our situation? Two CALL rooms til now Expansion from 2 >> 35 CALL rooms Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 61

SGU Wireless Campus Former CALL Rooms (before 2005. 4. 1) 第１ CALL室 A-202 第２ CALL室　A-201 Current CALL Rooms (after 2005. 4. 1) A-301 A-306 A-311 A-316 B-201 C-204 C-303 A-302 A-303 A-304 A-307 A-308 A-309 A-312 A-313 A-314 A-317 A-318 A-201 B-202 C-201 C-202 C-205 C-206 C-301 Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 C-305 C-306 A-305 A-310 A-315 A-202 C-203 C-302 C-307 62

On November 16 th, Kofi Annan announced the $100 laptop for all children campaign. Hundreds of millions of wireless laptops will be built for children all across the world. National governments will provide these learning tools for $100 per child or less. One Laptop Per Child (NGO) JALTCALL Don Hinkelman, http: //laptop. media. mit. edu/ 2006. 6. 4 63

Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 64

Research Design Research Paradigm Data Collection Data Analysis Site Selection Positionality Validity Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 65

Research Paradigms post-positivist, qualitative view constructivist, ecological learning perspective multiple paradigms both intersubjectivity and interobjectivity critical and pragmatic stance Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 66

Research Paradigms Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 67

Research Design Data Collection Action Research Autoethnography Data Analysis Actor Network Theory Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 68

Site Selection Criteria EFL in university setting Location irrelevent, or less immaterial to framework being studied Sites chosen for convenience and active use of blended learning Locations: Three universities in Japan General English, Shakai Joho, at SGU Kanda University of International Studies Kyoto Sangyo University Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 69

Research Design I Units of Analysis: Roles/actions of all actors Themes of Interobjectivity Boundaries/responsibilities, negotiation spaces Size of actors Micro (self, teacher, task, course, classroom) and, Macro (curriculum, faculty, campus, environment) Units of Analysis: Community of practice Themes of Intersubjectivity Decisions and justifications of stakeholders Group aims and interests Conflicts, challenges, emergencies Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 70

Research Design II Site Comparison—Cycles, Methodology, Participants, Data Collection, Data Analysis Site Cycles Methodology Participants Data Collection Methods Data Analysis Methods Home/office 40 years continual Autoethnography Researcher diary, blog critical incidents innovations key issues 2 semesters onsite Nested Case Study -three classes -single LMS mod Research team Students Software engineers teacher diaries observation interview materials/interface Role, task, time, venue analysis. Movements and boundaries 2 semesters onsite Nested Case Study -three classes -single LMS mod Research team Students Software engineers teacher diaries observation interview materials/interface 1 week+ onsite Dept. Case Study -Engl. curriculum, multiple teachers Research team Administrators Teachers, students observation interview materials/interface Role, task, time, venue analysis. Movements and boundaries 1 week+ onsite Dept. Case Study Research team -Engl. curriculum, - Administrators Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL multiple teachers Teachers, 2006. 6. 4 students observation interview materials/interface Same 1970 -2010 SGU Cycle 1 2005 -2006 SGU Cycle 2 2006 -2007 KU Cycle 1 2005 -2006 KU Cycle 2 2006 -2007 Same 71

Research Design III: Positionality Participants Positionality Level Positionality Description Researcher 1 Insider alone SGU-1 classroom Research team Students Software team 2 Insider team SGU-2 classroom Research team Students Software team 2 Insider team 5 Outsider working with insiders Site Home/office KU-1 campus Research team Administrators Teachers, students KU-2 campus Research team Administrators 5 Don students Teachers, Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 Outsider working with insiders 72

Research Design IV: Validity Type of Validity Site Questions of Validity Importance Outcome Validity KU Does the research identify a problem and does the agreed upon action move to resolve it? 5% SGU Can a low level English class benefit from blended learning? Low cost/student satisfaction/learning? Process Validity KUSGU Does the cycle lead to further problem identification? Does triangulation work well? 15% Catalytic Validity KUSGU Is the research recognized across the department, and to other departments, causing further change? 30% Democratic Validity KUSGU Are silenced actors given voice in the process? Are teachers and students empowered? Are technophobic teachers/students represented? 20% Dialogic Validity KUSGU Is the research accepted for publication, in-house, nationally, internationally? Does the research create a dialogue amongst researchers, practitioners? How? What degree? 30% Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 73

Conclusions (preliminary) Teaching Theory is moving to… X O SLI/SLA Second Language Instruction/Acquisition SLS - Second Language Socialisation primary focus, blended with SLI & SLA Teaching Methods are moving to… X from drill & practice learning O to project & community-based learning focu, blended with drill, skill, and cognitive learning Teaching Technology is moving to… X from language laboratories, CD software O to wireless hardware, web-based software, community servers blended with face-to-face technogies Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 75

Conclusions (preliminary) Second Language Pedagogy is moving to… X Face-to-face learning (lectures, pair conversation) X Online learning (e-learning, laboratories) O Blended learning (simultaneous online/face-to-face) Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4 76

Blended Learning 対面学習とオンライン学習の統合 Action removes the doubt that theory cannot solve. Sun Tzu Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006. 6. 4