Thanks for this John - the links are useful. I agree about your
comments on
evaluation shifting towards the constructivist concepts - I guess
it goes
back to some of your earlier remarks regarding learners moving from
peripheral participation to full participation (in Dan Schneider's
words -
situated & shared cognition). You mention you use WebCT 3.8CE to
> promote reflective personal and professional development. I am assuming
you do this though the asynchronous discussion tool? As someone who
is
embarking on this journey next September I would be interested in
any
issues or problems you encountered in assessing students in this way
(from a constructivist perspective).
Norman Borrett
> ----------
> From: Konrad, John [CES][SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Reply To: Evaluation of online learning
> Sent: 02 June 2003 14:21
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: evaluation ofonline learning
>
> Dear Norman,
>
> Thanks for this reply.
>
> We have some experience of assessing students work based on a product and
> a reflective learning journal. In general, the VLE we use (WebCT 3.8CE)
> appears to promote reflective personal and professional development when
> linking process and product in such a socio-constructivist context.
>
> There are some interesting resources which colleagues might find useful:
>
> 1) MULTIMEDIA & LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS
> http://projects.edte.utwente.nl/pi/Papers/Papers.html
>
> 2) CONSTRUCTIVISM VERSUS OBJECTIVISM: IMPLICATIONS FOR INTERACTION, COURSE
> DESIGN, AND EVALUATION IN DISTANCE EDUCATION
> http://ceti.macam.ac.il/Courses/ma2/Constructivism-Versus-Objectivism2000.
> htm
>
> 3) Vrasidas, C. (2002). A systematic approach for designing hypermedia
> environments for teaching and learning. International Journal of
> Instructional Media 29(1). http://www.cait.org/vrasidas/hypermedia.pdf
>
> 4) Vrasidas, C. (2000). Constructivism versus objectivism: Implications
> for interaction, course design, and evaluation in distance education.
> International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 6(4), 339-362.
> http://www.cait.org/vrasidas/continuum.pdf
>
> For me, an interesting issue is whether our approach to evaluation should
> reflect a shift towards the Constructivist end of the continuum and if so,
> how?
>
> John
>
> John Konrad
> Senior Lecturer in Professional Development
> Course Leader, MSc (Teaching and Learning using ICT)
> http://www.lmu.ac.uk/ces/epd/courses/mscict.htm
> School of Education & Professional Development
> Leeds Metropolitan University
> Carnegie Hall
> Beckett Park Campus
> Leeds LS6 3QS
> Phone: 0113 283 2600 ext 3634
> Fax: 0113 283 3181
> IP Address: 160.9.201.215
> http://www.lmu.ac.uk/ces/epd/staff/konradj.htm
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Norman Borrett [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 02 June 2003 10:33
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: evaluation ofonline learning
>
> John - very helpful comments (and links). I am using a
> socio-constructivist
> approach (Pate's 'Blended Contructivism') to e-learning for a Supervision
> module on a Post. Grad Certificate (due to start in September). The
> learning
> is based upon student interaction and support, and interaction with 'real
> world' events (ie the practice of supervision). We are using a Learning
> Portfolio to integrate ideas, thoughts and progress. The Portfolio will
> also
> be used for assessment. Do you have any experiences in using portfolios in
> this way?
> Regards
> Norman Borrett
>
> > ----------
> > From: John Konrad[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > Reply To: Evaluation of online learning
> > Sent: 29 May 2003 15:17
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: evaluation ofonline learning
> >
> > It's interesting to consider what would count as "e-learning criteria".
> > In a conventional learning environment, we would consider such
> parameters
> > as product and process learning outcomes.
> >
> > In an e-learning environment a key issue, for me, is the importance of
> > achieving an operationally viable balance between a traditional
> > behaviourist approach and socio-constructivist approaches. See
> > http://tecfa.unige.ch/proj/seed/catalog/docs/goteburg03-talk.pdf and
> > http://www.coe.uga.edu/ctl/theory/blended.pdf
> >
> > When adults learn, they generally operate in a familiar learning
> > environment that they have been socialised into since they entered the
> > formal learning/schooling system. Online learning is generally
> unfamiliar
> > territory or even terra incognito!
> >
> > If this is the case, where does this leave our approaches to assessment?
> > For example: Have the learners learned what they are required to (by
> > whom)? How have the learners benefited from their experiences? What new
> > communities of practice have they joined? How far have learners move
> from
> > "Legitimate Peripheral Participation" to "Full Participation"[Lave J and
> > Wenger E (1991) Situated Learning, 34-37]?
> >
> > These questions seems to me to be more important than the immediate
> issues
> > of whether learners are comfortable and confident in an online
> > environment.
> >
> > John
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Evaluation of online learning
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
> > Ramachandran, Muthu [IES]
> > Sent: 28 May 2003 11:29
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: evaluation of e-learning
> >
> > Fatima,
> > It is a good start. To conduct an evaluation we need to identify a
> > framework of e-learning criteria so hat we can then map on to them
> against
> > existing classification of tools.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Muthu
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Baigar, Fatima [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: 28 May 2003 11:33
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: evaluation of e-learning
> >
> > Dear All,
> > I am writing a document on evaluation of e-learning, I am sending you a
> > draft of this document, if you have any comments, suggestions, it would
> be
> > grateful.
> > Thanks very much.
> > Best wishes.
> > Fatima.
> > CESI
> > 297 rue de Vaugirard
> > 75015 Paris
> > 00 33 (1) 44 19 23 45
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
> >
> >
>
|
