Patrick McAndrew

Informal learning with PDAs and smartphones

There has been increasing interest in informal learning in recent years alongside interest in how such learning can be supported by technology. However, relatively little is known about the extent to which adults make use of their own mobile devices to support informal learning. In this study, a survey was used to investigate whether, and to what extent, experienced users of mobile devices use their mobile devices to support intentional informal learning. If so, do they make use of mobile device connectivity to support opportunistic informal learning and does such connectivity support or encourage collaborative informal learning? Experienced mobile device users were recruited from web forums and business, and asked whether they used their devices to support informal learning. A pattern of learning uses emerged, some of which deployed the mobile device capabilities relatively unchanged, others triggered adaptations to typical learning activities to provide a better fit to the needs of the learner. These informal learning activities provided the basis for the design of a flexible mobile learning framework that can be extended to support developments in mobile technology, and increasing use of Web 2.0 technologies by informal learners.

Patterns, designs and activities: unifying descriptions of learning structures

In this paper, we examine emerging ways to describe and structure learning material, learning tasks and learning situations. In particular, we consider three different approaches, looking at common issues and differences in emphasis. These approaches are: learning patterns, inspired by the architectural patterns of Alexander; learning design, as described in the IMS Learning Design specification and which itself draws on Educational Modelling Language (EML) developed at The Open University of the Netherlands and learning activities as used in the Learning Activity Management System (LAMS).

Are open educational resources systematic or systemic change agents for teaching practice

Open educational resources (OER) raise many similar issues for education to those that have surrounded Learning Objects (LO). However the greater use and availability of digital technologies and open licensing seems to be enabling OER to have wider acceptance into individual and institutional teaching practice. While the need for appropriate design in teaching and learning on the part of educators, which was the primary driver of developments in LO, remains, the very openness of OER is changing the relationships between educators, learners and content (resources) and is becoming a primary agent of change. Experience in OpenLearn, a major initiative to provide OER from The Open University, indicates that some of these changes can be planned for while others will emerge as releasing content openly imposes evolutionary pressures that accelerate change and work around barriers. Development can then be driven by learner expectations of the technology and needs for informal life-long learning that in turn impact on how content is being designed and openly presented. It is argued that this represents a shift from a teacher-centric, systematic model of change in teaching practices as embodied in earlier ideas about LO to a learner-centric, systemic model of change as embodied in OER.

Open Learning at a Distance: Lessons for Struggling MOOCs

Support for nontraditional students, team-based quality control, and assessment design are critical. Free education is changing how people think about learning online. The rise of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) (1) shows that large numbers of learners can be reached. It also raises questions as to how effectively they support learning (2). There is a timeliness in the introduction of MOOCs, reflecting the right combination of online systems, interest from good teachers in reaching more learners, and banks of digital resources, predicted as a “perfect storm of innovation” (3). However, learning at scale, at a distance, is not a new phenomenon. Seeing MOOCs narrowly as a technology that expands access to in-classroom teaching can miss opportunities. Drawing on decades of lessons learned, we set out aims to help spur innovation in science education.

Developing an approach for Learning Design Players

Commentary on: Chapter 19: The Edubox Learning Design Player. (Tattersall, Vogten & Hermans, 2005) Abstract: The EduBox system as described in Tattersall, Vogten and Hermans (2005) was developed at the Open University of the Netherlands in order first to support the use of EML as a formal way to describe its courses, and then redeveloped to support later versions of EML that evolved into Learning Design. Edubox is located as a solution for the OUNL and this allows it to offer a viable platform for student use and to use particular implementations for aspects that are not fully determined in the Learning Design specification. Examples of these are the ways to use question and test and the format for content. Edubox is built around EML 1.1 which is very similar to Learning Design but not identical. This means that EduBox is not designed as the basis for players outside the OUNL. This paper looks at developments on players that can be used more widely. It focuses on the use of the CopperCore Learning Design Engine [1] as a basis for how a player can work and two related implementations that use that engine: the Copper Core LD player and the SLeD player [2]. In all cases the intention is to produce open source software for free reuse and to assist others working in the same area. Editors: Colin Tattersall and Rob Koper. Interactive demonstrations: A demonstrator service for the SLeD system is under development and can be accessed at http://sled.open.ac.uk/ .

Applying Learning Design to Supported Open Learning

LD is an exciting concept that enables us to engage with ways to describe educational design and material in a new way. The consequences of a full LD implementation could mean entirely new ways of working with separation of design, content and presentation with benefits for sharing and reuse. What the initial study at The Open University has shown is that even before such implementations are available the approach advocated by LD is allowing a fresh look at the structures and designs in use across the University and giving a practical way to implement reviews in a way that can support staff and potentially improve the student experience. LD can produce good descriptions of activities and in doing so reveal aspects that are unclear. It may be possible to break down courses informally into tasks and roles without using the full IMS specification, however, the formal approach taken by LD means that technical validation of materials can automate some of the checking and management of the designs. Forward plans to adopt LD can build on the significant community activity now taking place, both within the Valkenburg Group, supported by the UNFOLD project, and outside any formal support system. We expect that progress will be made on integrated players, the design of tools that can support specialised design aspects, sharing of designs, and research into pedagogic validation.

Game-Play Breakdowns and Breakthroughs: Exploring the Relationship Between Action, Understanding, and Involvement

Game developers have to ensure their games are appealing to, and playable by, a range of people. However, although there has been interest in the game-play experience, we know little about how learning relates to player involvement. This is despite challenge being an integral part of game-play, providing players with potential opportunities to learn. This article reports on a multiple case-study approach that explored how learning and involvement come together in practice. Participants consisted of a mix of gamers and casual players. Data included interviews, multiple observations of game-play, postplay cued interviews, and diary entries. A set of theoretical claims representing suggested relationships between involvement and learning were developed on the basis of previous literature; these were then assessed through a critical examination of the data set. The resulting theory is presented as 14 refined claims that relate to micro and macro involvement; breakdowns and breakthroughs in action, understanding, and involvement; progress; and agency, meaning and compelling game-play. The claims emphasize how players experience learning via breakthroughs in understanding, where involvement is increased when the player feels responsible for progress. Supporting the relationship between learning and involvement is important for ensuring the success of commercial and educational games.

Facing the challenge in evaluating technology use in mobile environments

The process of developing innovative mobile approaches to informal and formal learning is challenging, not least in needing to satisfy stakeholders with diverse interests in the technology, the pedagogy and the overall system. Some approaches to evaluation may focus on examining the nature and quality of learning that occurs, while other methods may take a user‐centred approach to understand interactions with the systems. In this paper we highlight a methodology that attempts to address these two analytical issues in parallel, and to communicate the results to stakeholders. The methodology is grounded in cultural historical activity theory and is compatible with other views emerging that such evaluation can have multiple levels. The method applies task analysis to examine the conflicts that emerge when learners are interacting with technological systems in an informal learning setting. Results from a trial involving first‐aiders are used to illustrate the techniques as they were applied as part of a European project that developed a collaborative mobile learning environment. The method has been repeated in other studies and is suggested to provide a valuable tool to reflect on understanding and enable the sharing of perspectives on evaluation outcomes.

The evolutionary design of a Knowledge Network to support knowledge management and sharing for lifelong learning

Knowledge Management (KM) and knowledge sharing are important factors that support lifelong learning, and enable people to continue developing throughout their careers. The concept of a Community of Practice (Wenger, 2000) is attractive in drawing together people whose work shares similar aspects, and consideration is given here to how technology can be used to develop and support such a community. In this paper, concepts from the Community of Practice literature are used to consider the development of a software environment for people working as a community in the area of lifelong learning. The intention was to design the system in an evolutionary way, using a minimal set of essential elements which would be elaborated according to user feedback. Three key design questions are considered: Who can contribute resources to such a system? What happens to existing practices? How is the community engaged? We conclude that, in lifelong learning, knowledge management supported by a software environment offers a good way to bring together communities, resources and experience, but to achieve these benefits, great care needs to be exerted in introducing the system and maintaining existing work practices.

Learning the Lessons of Openness

The Open Educational Resources (OER) movement has built up a record of experience and achievements since it was formed 10 years ago as an identifiable approach to sharing online learning materials. In its initial phase, much activity was driven by ideals and interest in finding new ways to release content, with less direct research and reflection on the process. It is now important to consider the impact of OER and the types of evidence that are being generated across initiatives, organisations and individuals. Drawing on the work of OLnet ( http://olnet.org ) in bringing people together through fellowships, research projects and supporting collective intelligence about OER, we discuss the key challenges facing the OER movement. We go on to consider these challenges in the context of another project, Bridge to Success ( http://b2s.aacc.edu ), identifying the services which can support open education in the future. Keywords: OER, policy, open education, services, reflection, collective intelligence