Mobiililaitteet ja koulu: hypeä ja arkirealismia

Mobiililaitteet ja koulu: hypeä ja arkirealismia

Jari Laru, kasvatustieteiden tiedekunta, Oulun yliopisto

2012

Vaitos.jarilaru.eu

VERRYTTELY

• Mitä haluat kuulla mobiiliteknologian opetuskäytöstä?

7362www.socrative.com huone nro:

YLEISKATSAUS ILMIÖÖN

~2000 ~2010

Gartnerin hypekäyrä (Laru, 2012)

http://vodpod.com/watch/15508281-alan-kays-dynabook-rare-nhk-video-ipad-1960-1970-lukujen-taitteessa?u=larux&c=mobiililuento

http://www.slideshare.net/larux/1-luento-tieto-ja-viestinttekniikan-perusteet-opintojaksolla-tvt-opetuskytn-historia

Roschelle, J., & Pea, R. (2002). A walk on the WILD side: how wireless handhelds may change CSCL, 51-60. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1658616.1658624

2002“His 2002 paper with Roy Pea, "Walk on the Wild Side," has been influential in understanding the future possibilities for wireless handheld learning devices”

Tulevaisuus on tänään

Dillenbourg, P. (2010), The appeal of motionless devices in a world where everything moves. Keynote talk at the 6th IEEE WMUTE 2010 Conference, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, accessed on June 29, 2011 athttp://wmute2010.cl.ncu.edu.tw/Pierre%20DILLENBOURG.pdf.

http://www.opencolleges.edu.au/infographic/media/21st_century_classroom.jpg

http://www.aronet.fi/downloads/SMART_Classroom_Tour_Working/START_HERE.html

KESKUSTELE LYHYESTI

• Millainen on koulunne tyypillinen oppimisympäristö: sovellukset / laitteet / välineet (tekn/ei tekn)

7362www.socrative.com huone nro:

TEOREETTINEN VIITEKEHYS JA PEDAGOGINEN MURROS..

Photos: Openclipart.org

TYÖKALU KOGNITIIVINEN TYÖKALU

Physical distribution

Social distribution

Symbolic distribution

openclipart

Jaettu kognitio

Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

KonstruktivismiOppiminen nähdään laajasti ottaen aktiivisena tietojen, merkityksien ja

käsityksien rakentamisena.

Nykyaikaisten oppimisympäristöjen

taustateoria

Oppiminen on erittäin monimutkainen prosessi

Yksilö

Yhteisö

Ympäristö(konteksti, välineet ym.)

From PPT by Jermann, P. Scripting collaboration with ManyScripts http://manyscripts.epfl.ch/

Opettajajohtoisuus Kone opettajana

Opettajan tehtävä on järjestää oppimistilanteita – orkestroida..

Dillenbourg, P. (2010), The appeal of motionless devices in a world where everything moves. Keynote talk at the 6th IEEE WMUTE 2010 Conference, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, accessed on June 29, 2011 athttp://wmute2010.cl.ncu.edu.tw/Pierre%20DILLENBOURG.pdf.

KESKUSTELE

• Mihin koulunne opetus perustuu?– Behaviorismi vs. Konstruktivismi– Tarkasti suunniteltu vs. Improvisoitu– Opettajajohtoinen vs. Orkestroitu– Yksilön työskentely vs. Kollaboraatio– Jne.. (dikotomiat vain herätteenä)

KOULU EI MUUTU, MIKSI?

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:School%27s_everyday_life.jpg

Text

Politiikka Oppilaat Infrastruktuuri

http://www.slideshare.net/larux/tietotyon-p-haasteita/

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:School%27s_everyday_life.jpg

Text

Politiikka Oppilaat Teknologia

http://www.slideshare.net/larux/tietotyon-p-haasteita/

Lonka (2011). Sulautuvat oppimisympäristöt innostumisen ja onnistumisen lähteenä. Sulautuvan opetuksen seminaari 10.3.2011

http://blogs.helsinki.fi/sulautuvaopetus/ohjelma/

KOULU JA OPPIMINEN 2010 LUVULLA

http://yle.fi/puhe/ohjelmat/puheen_aamu/professori_lonka_opettaja_on_monelle_oppilaalle_se_lahin_ihminen_3878.html

http://www.tiede.fi/blog/2012/09/15/miksi-koulussa-pitaa-muistaa-vaikka-kaikki-loytyy-netista

http://blogi.somy.fi/pilvipalveluista-haaste-koululle

http://suomenkuvalehti.fi/blogit/eri-mielta/koulun-tietotekniikka-ajan-tasalle-yo-kirjoitukset-sahkoisesti-vuonna-2019

http://www.opencolleges.edu.au/infographic/media/21st_century_classroom.jpg

“Tänään koulunsa aloittava lapsi on työelämässä vielä vuonna 2074” (HS,

Elokuu 2012)

KESKUSTELE

• Miten koulusi ottaa huomioon HS:n hoksautuksen työelämästä vuonna 2074?

• Mitä taitoja 2074 tarvitaan? Onko se ulkoaoppimista ja oppikirjojen mukaan opiskelua vai muuta?

• Onko teillä muutosvastarintaa koulun henkilökunnan / vanhempien / opiskelijoiden keskuudessa

• Jne..

TUTKIMUSESIMERKKEJÄ

~2000 ~2010

Gartnerin hypekäyrä (Laru, 2012)

Aims of the study I/II

The general focus of this doctoral thesis is to apply theoretical ideas of distributed cognition and scaffolding for mobile computer supported collaborative learning in authentic contexts

Aims of the study II/II

• The first aim was to analyze the nature of collaboration in the mobile technology supported settings of collaborative learning (papers I and III-IV) and work (paper II)

• The second aim was to experiment the kind of scaffolding of mobile computer supported collaboration that can enrich collaborative learning (papers I,III-IV) and work (paper II)

• The third aim was to discuss the methodological issues for studying social interactions and collaborative learning in mobile computer supported activities (I-IV)

Research design

The research design combines chracteristics from the design based research (DBR), Case-study approach (Yin, 2003) and situated approach (Greeno, 2006)

FLE3mobile

SmartLibrary

Tiernajack

Flyers

Flyers

Script

Micro: sentence openers

Core activity

Knowledge building

Macro: Free collaboration

Instructional design

Theory

Foundations

Virtual master’s programme

FLE3

ContextMobile tool

Qualitative content analysis

Main methods

Social network analysis 1st analysis

2nd analysis

Mobile toolFieldtrip (K12)

Context

Script

Core activity

Argumentative inquiry learning

Integrated learning script

Instructional design

Theory

Progressive inquiry learningKnowledge building

Theory

Inquiry learningArgumentative learning

1st analysis

2nd analysis

Data

Logs, interviews, questionnaires

Macro: Storyboard + tutors

Micro: Sentence openers

Results & findings

Data

Flyers, audio recordings, mindmaps

Qualitative content analysis

Main methods

Mann Whitney U-test

Core activity

Blended learning EI

Script

Integrated learning script

Results & findings

Higher Education

Context

Instructional design

Mobile tool

Media uploader Google Reader

Social software (students)

Media sharing WeblogWikiRSS Reader

Tools

Social software (class)

Course blogCourse wikiRSS aggregats

1st analysis

Data

Log data, recordings, knowledge test, wiki history, content

Bayesian modeling

Main methods

Qualitative content analysis (mixed)

2nd analysis

Paper IV

Preliminary analysisPaper I

Paper II

Paper III

Theory (analytical lens)

Community of Practise

Case II

Case I

Case III

Laru, J. & Järvelä, S. (2008). Social patterns in mobile technology mediated collaboration among members of the professional distance education community. Educational Media International Journal, 45(1),17-3.

Single task, free collaboration

Collective task

Existing master’s programs

New master’s program

Knowledge building activity

Microscript

stimulus

Interviews

Log-files Social network analysis (SNA)

Content analysis

Database

Matrices

Results

Overall, the analyses revealed nonparticipative behaviour within the online community.

The social network analysis revealed structural holes and sparse collaboration among participants in the offline community. It was found that due to their separated practices in the offline community, they didn’t have a need for mobile collaboration tools in their practices.

External script

Co-operative learning Microscript: Knowledge building Self-study

Activity: Collaborative knowledge building (progressive inquiry learning)

Internal script Internal script(s)

Activity: Argumentative knowledge construction

prestructuring

Core activity

Post structuring

- Integrated learning script -

CSCL Integrated learning script CSCL

SWISH

Activities: Conceptualizations, reflections, elaborations, knowledge construction

prestructuring

Core activity

Post structuring

Emergent interaction pattern(s)

Emergent interaction pattern(s)

Nonparticipativebehavior

ag

ag

agag

ag

Laru, J. & Järvelä, S. (2008). Social patterns in mobile technology mediated collaboration among members of the professional distance education community. Educational Media International Journal, 45(1),17-3.

STUDY 2: FLYERS

Audio recordings of argumentative discussions

Knowledge claim messages

Content analysis

Top-performers

Results

Mindmap Post-test

Mindmap Pre-test

Mindmap analysis

Low performers

Mann-Whitney U-test

Task 1 Task 2 Task 3

Macroscript

Microscript

Storyboard Argumentative discussions

Review and comparisonConclusive discussion

Collective activities Small-group activities

Three independent tasks + didactic envelope

Although the results revealed several shortcomings in the types of argumentation...

….In general, the use of the mobile tool likely promoted important interaction during inquiry learning, but led to superficial epistemological quality in the knowledge claim messages.

External script

Co-operative learning Microscript: Knowledge building Self-study

Activity: Collaborative knowledge building (progressive inquiry learning)

Internal script Internal script(s)

Activity: Argumentative knowledge construction

prestructuring

Core activity

Post structuring

- Integrated learning script -

CSCL Integrated learning script CSCL

SWISH

Activities: Conceptualizations, reflections, elaborations, knowledge construction

prestructuring

Core activity

Post structuring

Emergent interaction pattern(s)

Emergent interaction pattern(s)

Nonparticipativebehavior

ag

ag

agag

ag

Course feed

WikiworkPhototaking

A.Ground C.ConceptualizeB.ReflectD. Reflect & elaborate

E. Review & evaluate F. Co-construct knowledge

G.Monitor Tools used to merge multiple RSS feeds

Merged feedsMultiple feeds

Course blog and wiki Mobile applications

Course level tools

Group level tools

Monitoring tools

Lecture Discussion Blogging Discussion

Collaborative Solo Collaborative

Phase:

Software:

Activity:

Figure 4. Socio-technological design of the course. The idea of making use of each others’knowledge was operationalized in socio-technical design. It consisted of recurrent individual and collective phases in which students used multiple Web 2.0 tools and mobile phones in concert to perform designed tasks. Retrieved from: Jari Laru, Piia Näykki, Sanna Järvelä, Supporting small-group learning using multiple Web 2.0 tools: A case study in the higher education context, The Internet and Higher Education, Available online 28 August 2011, ISSN 1096-7516, 10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.08.004.

Separated tasks w integrated subtasks+ Swish

Macro

1st topic

Grounding (Lecture) Reflect (Discussion)

Review and evaluate (Discussion)

Collective activities Small-group activities

2nd topic 3rd topic

Individual activities

Conceptualize (Photo [mobile])

Reflect and elaborate (Blog)

Co-construct of knowledge(Wiki)

Core activity

Micro S1

Micro S2

Micro S3

Micro S4

Micro S5

Monitor (RSS [mobile])

Collaboration script

Micro Sn = Microscript nMacro = Macroscript

Wordpress

Results

Wikispaces

Conceptual knowledge post-

test

Flickr Google ReaderShozuDiscussions

Conceptual knowledge post-

test

Knowledge test analysis

Analysis of the engagement

Paired samples t-test

Normalized learning gain

On task analysis

Analysis of Wiki history

Bayesian dependency & classification modeling

Descriptive analysis

In our case, we found that using social software tools together to perform multiple tasks likely increased individual knowledge acquisition during the course.

Bayesian classification analysis revealed that the best predictors of good learning outcomes were wiki-related activities.

External script

Co-operative learning Microscript: Knowledge building Self-study

Activity: Collaborative knowledge building (progressive inquiry learning)

Internal script Internal script(s)

Activity: Argumentative knowledge construction

prestructuring

Core activity

Post structuring

- Integrated learning script -

CSCL Integrated learning script CSCL

SWISH

Activities: Conceptualizations, reflections, elaborations, knowledge construction

prestructuring

Core activity

Post structuring

Emergent interaction pattern(s)

Emergent interaction pattern(s)

Nonparticipativebehavior

ag

ag

agag

ag

Comparison between experiments

Topic

Topic 1

Topic 2

Topic 3

Topic 1

Topic 2

Topic 3

Subtask n Subtask n+1

Subtask n Subtask n+1

Subtask n Subtask n+1

Topic 1

Topic 2

Topic 3

Subtask n Subtask n+1

Subtask n Subtask n+1

Subtask n Subtask n+1

Didactic envelopes (Dillenbourg, 2002) Swish splits (Dillenbourg & Jermann, 2006)

X

X

Free

Conclusion

Simple tools, rich pedagogical practises (Roschelle, 2002)

TEKNOLOGIADEMOJA

Opetustilanne A (striimaus)

IPAD => KONE => TYKKI

http://www.reflectionapp.com/

Minkä tahansa sovelluksen voi ohjata tykille. Esim. Smart Notebookin iPad version

Opetustilanne B (kontrolli)

IPAD kannettavan kosketusnäyttönä (kontrolloi konetta)

Opetustilanne C (kontrolli+”älytaulu”)

Useimmiten käyttö aloitetaan sovelluksia etsimällä..

Ja se jatkuu sovelluksia etsimällä..

http://edudemic.com/2012/09/5-critical-mistakes-schools-ipads-and-correct-them/

LAITERIIPPUMATTOMUUS TULEE..HTML5

http://sketchometry.org/

Simple tools, rich pedagogical practises (Roschelle, 2002)

OMAT Kokemukset mobiililaitteista

• Keskustele vierustoveriesi kanssa- Mitä mobiililaitteita koulussanne on?- Miten niitä hallitaan?- Mitä sovelluksia niissä on? Miten niitä käytetään

osana opetusta?

“Hankin aikoinani kaikki opetusohjelmat.KAIKKI. Siis hankin ihan kaikki.

Pyrin hallitsemaan niiden käyttämisen täydellisesti. Sitten huomasin että se ei ole mahdollista”(Norssi, 08, 2012)

“Tänään koulunsa aloittava lapsi on työelämässä vielä vuonna 2074” (HS, Elokuu

2012)

http://www.jarilaru.euhttp://slideshare.net/larux

http://www.mendeley.com/profiles/jari-laru

KIITOS