Analyzing university students’ participation in the co-design of learning scenarios

Iolanda Garcia Universitat Oberta de Catalunya

Design2Learn Project EDU2012-37537 Plan Nacional I+D+i.

http://design2learn.wordpress.com/

11TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE LEARNING SCIENCES. Boulder, Colorado, USA 23-27 June, 2014

Design2Learn project

The project aims to study the development of more authentic, contextualized and learner-focused learning scenarios through a co-design process involving students and teachers in the negotiation of the design principles of such scenarios to assess the potential of this approach as a catalyst for change and innovation in higher education.

Theoretical foundations

Research strands on students participation

• Student engagement

• Student voice

• Students as producers

Participatory experiences in HE

• Weak definition of participation

• Risks and failures

• Need to articulate

implementation strategies

Defining (learning) design

”… design is by nature iterative and collaborative. It requires discussion, reflection, critique and implementation, so it works better in teams in which there is a complementarity of skills and knowledge. Being a cognitively demanding task, it requires tools and representations that allow for abstraction to be managed and understood”.

Goodyear & Retalis (2010)

Defining co-design

"a highly-facilitated, team-based process in which teachers, researchers and developers work together in defined roles to design an educational innovation, realize the design in one or more prototypes, and evaluate each prototype's significance for addressing a concrete educational need".

Roschelle, Penuel & Shechman (2006)

Project rationale

DESIGN PRINCIPLES

- Inquiry based learning model

- Technology enhanced & Networked learning

- Co-design instruments & strategies with special attention to student perspective

1. Co-design processes involving students and teachers can facilitate the adoption of an inquiry-based learning model mediated by a more mature and autonomous use of technology by students in open and networked environments.

2. Students’ participation in the co-design process can integrate their perspective and promote deeper learning.

3. The use of tools for representing teaching and learning practice can facilitate the co-design process.

Design principles

Pedagogical model (IBL)

Use of technology (TEL/ NL)

Co-design strategy

LEARNING SCENARIO

- Participatory learning- Social learning- Ubiquitous learning- Open learning- Personalized and self-directed learning

- Learning through inquiry- Problem/Question-led- Application of scientific method- Student-centered learning- Inductive approach to learning content- Teacher as a guide

- Based on student perspective- Representation instruments to support LD- Participatory design strategies- Teachers & students as researchers- Teachers & students as designers

Research questions

• RQ1. How are participants’ roles and levels of intervention negotiated, assigned and managed throughout the co-design process? (students participation)

• RQ2. What are the strategies, instruments, stages and other critical issues to consider in the process of co-design? (students participation)

• RQ3. What are the effects of the co-design process on students’ perception of learning, teaching and learning design?

• RQ4. How does context (university model, area of knowledge, profiles) influence the co-design process?

Design-Based Research

A systematic, but flexible methodology aimed to improve educational practice through iterative analysis, design, development and implementation, based on collaboration between researchers and practitioners in real-world settings, and leading to contextually-sensitive design principles and theories.

Wang & Hannafin (2005)

4 learning subjects

• Two different university models: blended and virtual

• About 4 UB / 2 UOC teachers

• Different disciplines: economics, biomedical engineering, tourism, communication

• 11 students: 2, 6, 2, 1

Context (1st co-design cycle)

Research plan

Reported period

PHASE 1 – Preparation of the research team- Literature review and elaboration of the theoretical framework

- Elaboration of research design and instruments

Jan-Jul 2013

PHASE 2 – 1st Co-design cycle in 4 contextsSept-Jul 2014

Stage 1. Informed exploration and ideation of the

learning scenarios (researchers and teachers) Sept-Jan 2014

Stage 2. Enactment of the learning scenarios and

assessment (researchers, teachers and students)Jan-Jun 2014

Stage 3. Final evaluation and systematization of the

designed scenarios (researchers, teachers and

students) Jul 2014

PHASE 3 – 2nd Co-design cycleSept-Jul 2015

PHASE 4 – Broader impact evaluation- Analysis of the intervention in multiple contexts to improve

theory on learning co-design.Sept-Jan 2016

CONTEXTUALIZE & EMPATHIZE

PROBLEMATIZE &DEFINE

DOCUMENT& IDEATE

CONCEPTUALISE & PROTOTYPE

IMPLEMENT & ASSESS

Identify problem/s

related with teaching/

learning practice, define and

operationalize the design

challenge to address

Get involved to know the

participants’ context and needs, build

common ground and

understanding. Reflect and share

issues in your practice

Explore other experiences and decide suitable

design principles and pedagogical

approach. Generate variety

of ideas to address the

design challenge

Conceptualize a learning scenario able to solve the design challenge and turn it into a

visual and tangible model

that can be implemented and

tested

Implement the prototype in real context, monitor

and collect feedback about

the learning experience.

Assess, reflect and improve the

designed scenario

iterate – document – reflect – refine – iterate …

Design-based research framework

Problem finding Problem solving Solution testing

Theory-practice loop

CONTEXTUALIZE & EMPATHIZE

PROBLEMATIZE &DEFINE

DOCUMENT& IDEATE

CONCEPTUALISE & PROTOTYPE

IMPLEMENT & ASSESS

Implement the prototype in real context, monitor

and collect feedback about

the learning experience.

Assess, reflect and improve the

designed scenario

iterate – document – reflect – refine – iterate …

Design-based research framework

Problem finding Problem solving Solution testing

Theory-practice loop

WS1 (only students)• T1. Representation designed learning scenario in a timeline and identification pros & and cons.• T2. Put in common pros & cons found.• T3. Elaborate force map of 1 chosen common problem.

WS2 (students & teachers)• T1. Share force maps of common problems with teachers. • T2. Share timeline representation with pros & cons with teachers.• T3. Brainstorming about available digital learning resources in each context. • T4. Categorization of digital learning resources based on purpose of use and design principles.

WS3 (students & teachers)

• T1. Identification of IBL characteristics and reflection on personal experience with IBL.• T2. Improvement & ideation of new learning scenarios based on IBL and TEL principles.1

WS1 (only students)• T1. Representation designed learning scenario in a timeline and identification of pros & and cons.• T2. Put in common pros & cons found.• T3. Elaborate force map of 1 chosen common problem.

Participatory pattern workshops,

(Mor, Warburton, Winters, 2010)

WS2 (students & teachers)• T1. Share force maps of common problems with teachers. • T2. Share timeline representation with pros & cons with teachers.• T3. Brainstorming about available digital learning resources in each context. • T4. Categorization of digital learning resources based on purpose of use and design principles.EoR DF

Luckin, 2010

WS3 (students & teachers)

• T1. Identification of IBL characteristics and reflection on personal experience with IBL.• T2. Improvement & ideation of new learning scenarios based on IBL and TEL principles.1

Framework of analysis

R. INSTRUMENTS• Workshop direct & indirect observation• Workshop productions

R. INSTRUMENTS• Initial interview• Post-workshop short questionnaire• Final questionnaire

R. INSTRUMENTS• VL environment observation• Learning materials analysis

R. INSTRUMENTS• Analysis of learning scenarios

Dimensions of analysis

A

Co-design GROUP

DYNAMICS B Co-design CRITICAL ISSUES

A1Engagement B1 Reflection on student/teacher role

A2Collective contribution B2 Clarification IBL principles

A3Individual contribution B3 Clarification TEL principles

A4Conflicts B4 Task easiness

A5Centralized moderation B5 Emerging ideas/solutions

A6Role-taking comfort B6 Instruments usefulness

A7Collective agreement B7 Learning problems sharing

B8 Reflection on practice/learning approach

B9 Time management

B10 Clarification expected learning outcomes

Participation in the co-design process Perception of the co-design

process

Conceptions about

learning, teaching

• Group dynamics: interventions, role-taking,

decision-making, etc..

• Focus of co-design: tasks and tools used, design

principles integration, reflection on learning

experience, identification of problems, etc..

• Contributions to the designed scenario: a)

concerning methodological aspects; b) concerning

the use of technology as a learning resource.

• Understanding involved processes

in learning design.

• Assessment of the co-design

process: group dynamics and key

issues

• Assessment of the designed

scenarios.

• Perception of own contribution to

the process of co-design.

• Development of

concepts and attitudes

towards learning and

teaching, teacher and

student roles in the

university.

19

Qualitative analysis

- Workshops direct & indirect observation

Quantitative analysis

- Post-workshop questionnaire

RQ1 How are participants’ roles and levels of interventionnegotiated, assigned and managed throughout the co-design process?

RQ2. What are the strategies, stages and critical issues to consider in the process of co-design?

Framework of analysis

Preliminary results

Group dynamics

• The configuration of the groups is a key aspect in co-design work: number of participants, homogeneity/heterogeneity.

• Task nature and structure: short, quick and complete.

• Time management.

• Importance of feeling comfortable with the role taken.

Preliminary results

Critical issues co-design process

• Interest of confronting students-teachers perspectives

• Co-design instruments, tasks useful to support dialogue and reflection on learning practice/approach

• Difficulties in separating the analysis of the learning scenario and the general practice at the university. Reluctant towards teachers innovative practice.

• Anticipated problems/weak aspects identified in the learning scenarios mainly related with: team work, autonomous learning, content treatment/presentation, lack of motivation.

• TEL design principles compared with IBL ones difficult to capture in the design process and to reflect in the learning scenarios.

• Not very knowledgeable of the use of technologies for learning and not either very interested in proposing the use of new tools.

Questions instead of conclusions

• How to make progress in analyzing data and going back to theory to fuel the co-design process as it develops.

• Who is in control of the design process? What should be the role of each participant in co-design?

• How to find the balance between providing the necessary tools/foundations to support the design process and letting it emerge from its context/participants.

• How to involve participants in the research process.

• How to keep track of the process (activities undertaken, context conditions, products developed in the design process, etc.).

• How to sustain across time the multiple iterations required.

Preliminary results

0.00 1.25 2.50 3.75 5.00

Engagement

Collective contribution

Individual contribution

Conflicts

Centralised moderation

Role taking confort

Collective agreement

Group Dynamics All Workshops

Workshop 8Workshop 9Workshop 10

Preliminary results

0.00 1.25 2.50 3.75 5.00

Reflection on student/teacher role

Clarification expected learning outcomes

Clarification IBL principles

Clarification TEL principles

Tasks easiness

Emerging ideas/solutions

Instruments usefulness

Learning problems sharing

Reflection on practice/learning approach

Time management

Co-design Critical Issues All Workshops

Workshop 8

Workshop 9

Workshop 10

Preliminary results

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

Average A Average B

UB UOC

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

W8 w9 w10

Títu

lo d

e va

lore

sWorkshop evolution scoringComparison average scoring UB / UOC

Thank you

Iolanda Garcia

igarciago@uoc.edu

Design2Learn Project EDU2012-37537 Plan Nacional I+D+i.

http://design2learn.wordpress.com/

11TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE LEARNING SCIENCES. Boulder, Colorado, USA 23-27 June, 2014