Following on from the role the e-tutor last week, and how the skills need to be redefined, McCloughlin suggests that the same kind of redefinition is needed in supporting learners (in fact she include the role of the tutor in this)
Design guidelines for constructivist learning include:
· Providing experience of the knowledge construction process
· Providing experience in and appreciation of multiple perspectives
· Creating learning tasks that are relevant and authentic
· Encouraging ownership and voice in the learning process
· Embedding learning in social experience
· Encouraging the development of multiple modes of representation
· Encouraging self-awareness of the knowledge construction process
Models of support include:
(Beed, Hawkins and Roller 1991)
· Assisted modelling: Teachers provide some coaching and models that enable the completion of the task.
· Element identification: The teacher identifies the elements of the desired approach or
strategies to help students complete the task.
· Strategy naming: The teacher articulates a relevant strategy and students employ it on their
own.
(Roehler and Cantlon 1997)
· Offering explanations: Explicit statements are given by an expert to elaborate on learners’
emerging understandings.
· Inviting students’ participation: Learners are given opportunities to assume control of the
knowledge-building process.
· Verification and clarification of students’ understandings: If emerging understandings are
reasonable, the teacher verifies the students’ responses. If the understandings are erroneous,
the teacher offers clarification.
· Modelling of desired behaviours: This includes making thinking visible, as in think-aloud,
showing what someone thinks about the learning process at a given moment.
· Generating questions and comments as in think-aloud: This occurs, for example, when a
teacher shows how to articulate a problem-solving process by talking through the steps.
Teachers generate questions and comments initially and students then take over the
questioning role.
· Inviting students to contribute actively: Learners are encouraged to contribute clues in order to complete a task and to articulate their understandings of task demands.
Scaffolding in f2f is very different from online. In f2f the teacher and learner occupy the same space, and the support is teacher driven. Distance learning is resources based and self-paced and therefore direct teacher interventions is not always possible.
Effective support includes:
- Encouraging reflective thinking
- Provision of social support
- Interaction and extension of ideas with feedback from peers and mentors
Categories of scaffolding
· Orientation/ communication of expectation (clear comms of what they should achieve)
· Coaching (support via software)
· Eliciting articulation (expressing current understanding)
· Task support (aiding /person as expertise)
· Conceptual scaffolding (analytic skills through multiple answers)
· Metacognitive scaffolding (tools to record thinking)
· Procedural scaffolding (how to use resources , like databases etc)
· Strategic scaffolding (offer alternative pathways – engage in decision making)
Examples of technology only scaffolding:
Computer-Supported Intentional Learning Environment(CSILE). Based on a shared database where text and graphics can be stored. Students can then create their own ‘nodes’ of information that others can comment on, and the authors are notified when comments are made. It aims to promote knowledge building in a community. (more information on the Edutech wiki, or AECT)
Intelligent Tutoring Systems(ITS) .Learners are guided through sequences of tasks. The learners progress is charted against an expert model, and thus customised instruction o feedback is given.
Goal Based Scenarios(GBS). Here students engage in a task that has a goal to achieve, resources are provided to help this. This is most useful where mastery is involved, like in a science subject.
Design Support Environments(DSE) Students engage in the design of the software or instruction. It seems that this is mostly used in upskilling teachers to use online tools for education/learning design.
In summary McLoughlin characterises effective scaffolding as:
· reducing the scope for failure in the task that the learner is attempting;
· enabling learners to accomplish a task that they would not be able to achieve on their own;
· moving learners to a new and improved zone of understanding;
· bringing learners closer to a state of independent competence.
The ten dimensions
1.Goal Orientation
Highly Focused < > unfocused
But designed to support independent learning and task performance
2.Adaptability
Fixed< > Flexible
Meeting the needs of a diverse range of learners, and adapting as development occurs
3. Accessibility
High < >Low
When needed (just in time), eg tutorials or FAQs to assist
4.Alignment
High < > Low
Support should align with task goals and learning outcomes – the right tools and resources available at the right time.
5. Experiential value
High < > Low
Include ways that enable learners to plan, act and reflect. Afforded an experience
6.Collaboration
Supported < > Unsupported
Learning through social dialogue, opportunities to communication and collaborate.
7. Constructivism
Strong < > Weak
Knowledge construction rather than memorisation – offer tools and tasks to support this.
8.Learning Orientation
Teacher regulation < > Learner regulation
Should be moving from teacher to self to learner self direction
9. Multiplicity
one-dimensional < > multi-dimensional
limited to one aspect of learning to applicable to many aspects (eg metacognition,reflection, articulation)
10 Granularity
low< > High
The number of component parts within the activity – how can they be broken down by the learner?
Conclusion
Scaffolding needs to support learners by giving them more control over their learning environment and the activities they undertake, but it should not assume that learners know how to do this.
McLoughlin, C. (2002) ‘Learner support in distance and networked learning environments: ten dimensions for successful design’, Distance Education, vol.23, no.2, pp.149–62.
No comments:
Post a Comment