Designing Learning Sessions Using Design Patterns

University of Piraeus, Department of Digital Systems

Computer Supported Learning Engineering Laboratoryhttp://cosy.ted.unipi.gr

Symeon Retalis (retal@unipi.gr), P. Georgiakakis

This project is partially funded with support from the European Commission. This presentation reflects the views of the partners and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

www.design-practice.org

Overview

Motivation of our work Supporting Teachers/Practitioners

Designing effective scripts for supporting the computer supported collaborative creative (CSCC) process Learning Flow Design Patterns Variations of Design Patters

Adding recommendations to tools to support CSCC scripts

Concluding remarksidSpace project on Tooling and Training for collaborative product

innovation http://idspace-project.org

Need for better pedagogy

Explicit, dedicated pedagogical strategies to enhance of active learning should be communicated to practitioners (Baruah and Paulus, 2008).

ExamplesQ Collaborative Strategies: Jigsaw, TPS, Pyramid,

Role Playing, eARMA Creativity Strategies: Six Hats, SCAMPER, 5H1W

Collaborative Learning…

Source: Michael Beyerlein (2006), Keynote Address at American Creativity Association International Conference 2006

Unfocused activities and free collaboration does not

necessarily produce effective learning outcomes

Creative & Collaborative strategies/techniques Collaborative Strategies like Jigsaw, TAPS advocate that

there is no collaboration without communication Groups need not only communication, but also share information,

resources and knowledge

Source: http://gsic.tel.uva.es/collage

Needs when designing learning situations Dynamic learning scenarios need for:

Structured designs of collaborative creative problem solving situations

Flexible customizable designs of computer supported collaborative creativity situations (CSCC)

6

Activity level (macro): Collaborative learning flow, i.e., sequence of activities that make up a learning process

Action level (micro): Detailed learning actions within an activity

CL Flow Patterns

Broadly accepted techniques repetitively used by practitioners (best /good practices)

Codified as patterns for the design of (potentially

effective) CSCL scenarios (scripts) so that they can be reused in different

situations / content / disciplines

TPS CLFP Thinking, forming pairs and sharing

Source: http://gsic.tel.uva.es/collage

Problem Solving Steps1. Definition of the problem2. Constructing a strategy 3. Organizing information4. Allocation of resources5. Monitoring the solving process6. Evaluating the solving process

and outcomes (Sternberg, 2003)

eARMA CLFP for collaborative problem solving

The CLFP design pattern formatElement Explanation

Name Name of the FDPContext Environment type in which the CLFP could be appliedProblem Learning problem to be solved by the CLFPSolution Description of the proposal by the CLFP for solving the

problemActors and Actions Description of the actors involved in the collaborative

activity described by the CLFP as well as their activitiesTypes of Tasks Description of the types of groups of learners identified and

how they are related, types of tasks, together with their sequence, performed by the actors involved in the activity.

Example A real-world learning activity capable of being structured according to the CLFP

Related patterns Names of other interrelated patternsReferences List of resources for further reading

Variations of a strategy in a CLFP A new element needs to be added, entitled “variations”. This element will specify what to change and under

which conditions in the sequence of activities, the resources or the tools.

All these changes need to be justified in order to illuminate the rationale behind these variations. to give advice to designers on how to make effective mixtures of

strategies without harnessing the basic educational philosophy and added value

Example of Variations

Instead of the Sternberg’s model a teacher may select the IDEAL problem solving model (Bransford & Stein, 1984 which includes five steps.

Variations of a strategy in a CLFP – Preparation of a cocktail During the preparation of a cocktail,

the cornerstone is an understanding of the relationships between strong and weak, sour and sweet

in CSCL, a designer should blend the phases, the resources, and the tools (i.e. the ingredients) together cautiously. Otherwise, this scenario will resemble a weak or watery

development like a cocktail with inappropriate flavour, texture and colour.

Source: http://www.vincenzos.com/images/cocktail.gif

Recommendations during the design process Higher order, which will help a practitioner to choose

among the most suitable creativity strategy for a specific scenario/case. This choice will be based on elements such as the type of learning objectives need to be accomplished, the complexity of implementing a strategy as a whole and as per activities of the strategy.

Organisational recommendations which will involve decisions about the formation of groups, leadership schema, etc.

Technological recommendations which will concern the use of specific tools, features for the implementation of the strategy into a real specific scenario/case.

Selection criteria based on the operations types and activities Learning objectives. An example TAPPS strategy can

help in accomplishing the procedural objective of “promoting analytical reasoning skills”.

Types of problems that are best served with the strategies. For example, Jigsaw is most appropriate when a problem to be solved is “complex and can be easily divided into sections or independent sub-problems”.

Complexity or risk in terms of collaborative learning experienced needed. For example Jigsaw is complex and is probably more appropriate for experienced participants

Selection criteria

complexity: low|high type-of-problem: closed|open physical-requirements: yes|no emotions-dependent: yes|no interactive: low|high supporting-action: exporation|combination|transformation|evaluation

// characterization by Boden distance: short|long // the distance between an given input and the

possibly resulting idea moderator: yes|no expert_participants: yes|no

Recommendations in computable format

The example of the eARMA strategyThe example eARMA strategy: complexity: high type-of-problem: closed physical-requirements: no emotions-dependent: no interactive: high supporting-action: exploration, combination, evaluation distance: short moderator: no expert_participants: no

Open Issues…

Not all recommendations can be computable (e.g. bulding trust or the group size, etc.) However advice is needed

Building recommender systems Usable & effective for novice designer s/

practitioners Creating systems for supporting collaborative

creativity processes

Designing Learning Sessions Using Design Patterns

The present work was carried out as part of • the LdV Transfer of Innovation project “A Framework for Preparing Teachers to Teach with ICT” (ref LLP-LdV-TOI-09-CY-167918)

Symeon Retalis (retal@unipi.gr)

This project is partially funded with support from the European Commission. This presentation reflects the views of the partners and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

www.design-practice.org