eLearning in Diverse Subject-Matter Contexts

eLearning in Diverse Subject-Matter Contexts

Dissertation

Damla Yildirim (M.A.)

Supervision

Prof. Dr. Paul Klimsa

Prof. Dr. Heidi Krömker

Prof. Dr. Ludwig Issing

OUTLINE

Problem & Objectives

Research Question

Theoretical Framework

A Conceptual Framework

Method

Analysis

Synthesis

Limitations

Further Research

Questions

23/10/2014 eLearning in diverse subject-matter contexts 2

PROBLEM

Rather conducting product evaluation researches about eLearning, it is important to look at content and field-specific teaching and learning aspects.


(Baumgartner, 2003)

Do subject-matter contextual differences are indeed appearent within the framework of eLearning?

What are the major characteristics of subject-matter contexts in order to create more effective and efficient eLearning environments to enhance quality in higher education?


PROBLEM

• Explore the eLearning practices of diverse subject-matter contexts,

• Widen interdisciplinary practice of eLearning,

• Enhance the quality of eLearning offerings,

• Reduce gaps


OBJECTIVE


Research Question



Method

Analysis

Synthesis

Limitations

Further Research

Questions


OUTLINE

How do diverse subject-matter contexts practiceeLearning in terms of technological, instructional, and

organizational aspects in higher education?


RESEARCH QUESTION


Research Question



Method

Analysis

Synthesis

Limitations

Further Research

Questions


OUTLINE

• Development of Learning with Educational Technologies

• Philosophy of Education

• Learning Theories

• "Didaktik" and "Instructional Design"

• Subject-Matter Contextual Differences

• A Conceptual Framework of eLearning Instruction


THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK


Research Question



Method

Analysis

Synthesis

Limitations

Further Research

Questions


OUTLINE


A Conceptual Framework of eLearning Instruction

Flexible

Non-linear

Andragogy

Self-directed

Autonomous

Context-specific

Content-specific

Technology-based

A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Problem?




What is required to solve the problem?


Why eLearning should be practiced to solve

the determined problem?


In which ways could eLearning provide a

solution for the problem in the certain context?

A Conceptual Framework of eLearning Instruction

Subject-matter context & content

Adult learnersDidactical Design

Patterns & Emerging Technologies

The Criteria of Success

• Learning theory

• Aim

• Scenarios/Methods

• Technologies

• Social forms

• Communication &

collaboration

• Learner

profiles• Content

• Context

• Assessment &

Evaluation

• Feedback &

Reconstruction




Research question

Theoretical framework

A conceptual framework

Method

Analysis

Synthesis

Limitations

Further research

Questions


OUTLINE


• Qualitative Research

• In-dept semi-structured interviews

• eLearning experts (primary group)

• Lecturers from diverse subject-matter contexts (secondary group)

• Qualitative semi-structured surveys

• Development of codebooks

• Review of experience reports

METHOD


Research Question



Method

Analysis

Synthesis

Limitations

Further Research

Questions


OUTLINE


A theory-oriented approach

IssuesEngineering sciences’ subject-

matter contexts

Humanities/social sciences’

subject-matter contexts

Research > Teaching + -

Course design-related considerations - +

Document exchange + +

Deliberate development of essential technology + -

Reflection on web 2.0 - +

Encouragement of communication,

collaboration, interpretation, discussion,

interaction

- +

Media competency and literacy + -

Use of university offerings - +

Technical support - +

eLearning paradox + +

A practice-oriented approach


IssuesEngineering sciences’ subject-

matter contexts



Theoretical content + +

Document exchange & course organization + +

Research > Teaching + +

Focus on course design - +

Creative knowledge construction - +

Communication, collaboration, interaction - +

Use the power of visualizations + -

Flexibility + +

Job trainning - +

Use of what university offers - +

eLearning paradox + +


Research Question



Method

Analysis

Synthesis

Limitations

Further Research

Questions


OUTLINE


A conceptual framework of

eLearning Instruction

Engineering sciences’




Subject-matter content & context ≠ ≠

Aim = =

Learning Theory ≠ ≠

Scenarios / Methods =/≠ =/≠

Technologies =/≠ =/≠

Social Forms = =

Communication & Collaboration ≠ ≠

Feedback & Reconstruction =/≠ =/≠

Synthesis of theory and practice-oriented approaches

What are the benefits and challenges of eLearning

instruction for diverse subject-matter contexts?



BenefitsEngineering sciences’ subject-

matter contexts



Ease of document exchange + +

Power of visualizations + -

Communication, collaboration, interaction - +

Flexibility & mobility + +

Learning communities & networking - +

Remote laboratories + -

Simulation + +

Open Educational Resources + -

Active learners + +

Creation of essential technologies + -

Socialization of man - +

Quality improvement - +


ChallengesEngineering sciences’ subject-

matter contexts



Educational design related considerations + -

Handling technology - +

Reflect upon web 2.0 + -

Higher cost of production + -

Use of university offerings - +

Complex context structures - +

Time constrains + +

Decreasing number of learners in

classroom+ -

Lack of interpersonal communication and

extra verbal cues- +

Focus on technology rather than didactical

design- +

What are the attitudes of instructors from

diverse subject-matter contexts toward

eLearning?



Document exchange

Research >

teaching

Added-value

= for both subject-matter contexts

ATTITUDES

How would an eLearning environment look like

which meets the requirements of diverse subject-

matter contexts?



Imaginary eLearning environment Engineering sciences’ subject-

matter contexts



Enhanced visualization + -

One system for all + -

High interoperability + +

Facilitation of document exchange + -

Improve efficacy of teaching & learning + -

Social networking - +

ePortfolio - +

A personal coach - +

Opportunity to realize new educational

scenarios- +

Enhaced usability alike in web 2.0 - +

Participant Group I

Engineering Sciences’ Subject-Matter Contexts

• Moodle and the offerings of the university is enough

• If not, self-development of tools and technologies

Humanities/Social Sciences’ Subject-Matter Contexts

• No idea


Participant Group II


Research Question



Method

Analysis

Synthesis

Conclusion

Limitations

Further Research

Questions


OUTLINE


What is being achieved with the help of this dissertation?


• A sophisticated eLearning practice is still not put into practice.

• No common understanding (technology vs. instructional strategy).

• Evidence-based practice is common

• eLearning paradox (dilemma between drives and drivers)

• Organizational & technical barriers

(Rolfe et al., 2008; Mayrberger, 2008)

(Rolfe et al. 2008)


What kind of suggestions could be raised?


•Diffusion of eLearning 2.0 and emerging technologies

•Development of interdisciplinary and transdsciplinary collaboration and discourse

(Issing & Klimsa, 2009)


Research Question



Method

Analysis

Synthesis

Conclusion

Limitations

Further Research

Questions


OUTLINE

• Subjectivity of research outcomes

• Participation rate and the level of saturation

• A few technical problems

• Lack of sophisticated eLearning practice


LIMITATIONS


Research Question



Method

Analysis

Synthesis

Conclusion

Limitations

Further Research

Questions


OUTLINE

• Reveal new dimensions to communicate and diffuse eLearning 2.0 in higher education institutions.

• Investigate eLearning course development processes of diverse subject-matter contexts in order to overcome the gaps in development of eLearning 2.0 in higher education.


RECOMMENDATIONS

• Longitudunal evaluation of the extent of subject-matter context diversity in order to adjust eLearning practices with best practice cases (i.e. benchmarking).

• Disclose research over teaching phenomenon.

• Investigate the eLearning practices of emerging interdisciplinary subject-matter contexts.


RECOMMENDATIONS


Research Question



Method

Analysis

Synthesis

Conclusion

Limitations

Further Research

Questions


OUTLINE


QUESTIONS

Baumgartner, P. (2003) Didaktik, E-Learning Strategien, Softwarewerkzeuge und Standards - Wie passt das zusammen? In M. Franzen (Ed.). Mensch und E-Learning. Beiträge zur E-Didaktik und darüber hinaus (pp. 9-25). Aarau: Sauerländer.

Rolfe, V.E., Alcocer, M., Bentley, E., Milne, D., and Meyer-Sahling, J. (2008). Academic staff attitudes towards electronic learning in Arts and Sciences. European Journal of Distance Learning (EURODL), 2008(1). Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/?article=313#Appendix_1

Mayrberger, K. (2008). Fachkulturen als Herauforderung für E-Learning 2.0. In S. Zauchner, P. Baumgartner, E. Blaschitz, & A. Weissenbäck (Eds.). Offener Bildungsraum Hochschule. Freiheiten und Notwendigkeiten (pp. 157-168). Münster ; New York; München; Berlin : Waxmann.

Issing, L. J. & Klimsa, P. (Eds.). (2009). Online – Lernen: Handbuch für Wissenschaft und Praxis, München: Oldenbourg Verlag.


REFERENCES

eLearning in Diverse Subject-Matter Contexts

Education

Transcript of eLearning in Diverse Subject-Matter Contexts