Understanding experience complexity in a smart learning journey
Tóm tắt
This paper contributes to a pedagogical model for smart learning by establishing a framework of some considerations based on learner experience of smart learning journeys. Phenomenography is used to investigate variation of learner experience in smart learning journeys. Learners participate in ‘Literary London’, situated in London, UK, and 'Malta Democracy’, situated in Valletta, Malta. An inclusive relational hierarchy of experience complexity is demonstrated with vertical, horizontal and diagonal relationships between four categories of experience variation for a smart learning journey. A pedagogical relevance structure for smart learning is discussed, supporting connectivist-inspired participatory pedagogies for smart learning environments. Sample participants consist of Education degree university students, with one other discipline represented (English Literature and Creative Writing). Various levels of study, cultural and international backgrounds are represented. Understanding learner experience of these kinds of activities may help to support today’s growing culture of learning cities, to "promote lifelong learning opportunities for all" (Unesco SDG4), within a context of the European Commission 2018 Digital Competence Framework for Citizens.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Anderson T, Dron J (2011) Three generations of distance education pedagogy. Int Rev Res Open Distance Learn 12(3):80–97
Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR (eds) (2001) A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Addison Wesley Longman, New York
Ashworth P, Lucas U (1998) What is the ‘world’ of phenomenography? Scand J Educ Res 42(4):415–431. https://doi.org/10.1080/0031383980420407
Ashworth P, Lucas U (2000) Achieving empathy and engagement: a practical approach to the design, conduct and reporting of phenomenographic research. Stud High Educ 25(3):295–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/713696153
Biggs JB, Collis KF (1982) Evaluating the quality of learning-the SOLO taxonomy, 1st ed. Academic Press, New York
Bonanno P, Klichowski M, Lister P (2019) A pedagogical model for CyberParks. In: Smaniotto Costa C et al (eds) CyberParks—the interface between people, places & technology. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 11380. Springer, pp 294–307
Booth S (2008) Researching learning in networked learning—phenomenography and variation theory as empirical and theoretical approaches. In: Hodgson V et al (eds) Proceedings of the 6th international conference on networked learning, pp 450–455
Brown E (2010) Introduction to location-based mobile learning. In: Brown E (ed) Education in the wild: contextual and location-based mobile learning in action. A report from the STELLAR Alpine Rendez-Vous workshop series, STELLAR Alpine Rendez-Vous workshop. University of Nottingham, pp 7–9
Carretero S, Vuorikari R, Punie Y (2017) Digital competence framework for citizens, (DigComp 2.1), European Commission, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, retrieved from publications.jrc.ec.europa.se/repository/bitstream/JRC106281/web-digcomp2.1pdf_(online).pdf
Carroll JM, Shih PC, Kropczynski J, Cai G, Rosson MB, Han K (2017) The internet of places at community-scale: design scenarios for hyperlocal neighborhood. In: Konomi S, Roussos G (eds) Enriching urban spaces with ambient computing, the internet of things, and smart city design. IGI Global, pp 1–24. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-0827-4.ch001
Cook J (2010) Mobile phones as mediating tools within augmented contexts for development. In: Brown E (ed) Education in the wild: contextual and location-based mobile learning in action. A report from the STELLAR Alpine Rendez-Vous workshop series, STELLAR Alpine Rendez-Vous workshop, University of Nottingham, pp 23–26
Cope CJ (2002) Educationally critical aspects of the concept of an information system. InfSci J 2:67–78
Cutajar M (2017) The student experience of learning using networked technologies: an emergent progression of expanding awareness. Technol Pedagogy Educ. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2017.1327451
Dron J (2018) Smart learning environments, and not so smart learning environments: a systems view. Smart Learn Environ 5:25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-018-0075-9
Dunleavy M, Dede C, Mitchell R (2009) Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. J Sci Educ Technol 18(1):7–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9119-1
Edwards S (2005) Panning for gold: influencing the experience of web-based information searching, Doctoral Dissertation. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/16168/
Gurwitsch A (1964) The field of consciousness. Du-quense University Press, Pittsburgh
Gurwitsch A (2010) The collected works of Aron Gurwitsch (1901–1973). Volume III, The field of consciousness: theme, thematic field, and margin, Zaner R, ed. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2942-3
Henning PA (2018) Learning 4.0. In: North K, Maier R, Haas O (eds) Knowledge management in digital change, new findings and practical cases. Springer, Switzerland, pp 277–290
Hounsell D (2005) Contrasting conceptions of essay-writing. In: Marton F, Hounsell D, Entwistle N (eds) The experience of learning: implications for teaching and studying in higher education, 3rd (Internet) edition. University of Edinburgh, Centre for Teaching, Learning and Assessment, Edinburgh, pp 106–125
Husman J, Lens W (1999) The role of the future in student motivation. Educ Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3402_4
Hwang G (2014) Definition, framework and research issues of smart learning environments—a context-aware ubiquitous learning perspective. Smart Learn Environ. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-014-0004-5
Ireland J, Tambyah M, Neofa Z, Harding T (2009) The tale of four researchers: trials and triumphs from the phenomenographic research specialization. In: AARE 2008 international education conference, changing climates, education for sustainable futures, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane
Ireland C, Johnson B (1995) Exploring the FUTURE in the PRESENT. Des ManagInst Rev 6(2):57–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1948-7169.1995.tb00436.x
Jarrett K, Light R (2018) The experience of teaching using a game based approach: teachers as learners, collaborators and catalysts. Eur Phys Educ Rev. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X17753023
Kaapu T, Tiainen T (2009) Consumers’ views on privacy in e-commerce. Scand J Inf Syst 1(21):3–22
Kaapu T, Tiainen T (2010) User experience: consumer understandings of virtual product prototypes. In: Kautz K, Nielsen PA (eds) 2010 proceedings first Scandinavian conference on information systems, Scandinavian information systems research, SCIS 2010 Rebild, Denmark, pp 18–33
Koole M (2012) A social constructionist approach to phenomenographic analysis of identity positioning in networked learning. In: Hodgson V, Jones C, de Laat M, McConnell D, Ryberg T, Sloep P (eds) Proceedings of the 8th international conference on networked learning 2012, Maastricht, Netherlands
Kop R (2012) The unexpected connection: serendipity and human mediation in networked learning. Educ Technol Soc 2(15):2–11
Koper R (2014) Conditions for effective smart learning environments. Smart Learn Environ 1:5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-014-0005-4
Larsson J, Holmström I (2007) Phenomenographic or phenomenological analysis: does it matter? Examples from a study on anaesthesiologists’ work. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being 2(1):55–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482620601068105
Lister P (2018) A smarter knowledge commons for smart learning. Smart Learn Environ 5:8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-018-0056-z
Liu D, Huang R, Wosinski M (2017) Future trends in smart learning: Chinese perspective. In: Liu D, Huang R, Wosinski M (eds) Smart learning in smart cities. Lecture notes in educational technology. Springer, Singapore
Marton F (1981) Phenomenography—describing conceptions of the world around us. Instr Sci 10:177–200
Marton F, Booth S (1997) Learning and awareness. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ
Marton F, Pong WP (2005) On the unit of description in phenomenography. High Educ Res Dev 24(4):335–348
Marton F, Säljö R (1976) On qualitative differences in learning: I—outcome and process. Br J Educ Psychol 46:4–11
Reed B (2006) Phenomenography as a way to research the understanding by students of technical concepts. In: Núcleo de Pesquisa em Tecnologia da Arquitetura e Urbanismo (NUTAU): Technological Innovation and Sustainability. Sao Paulo, Brazil, pp 1–11
Siemens G (2005) A learning theory for the digital age. Instruct Technol Distance Educ 2(1):3–10
Sjöström B, Dahlgren LO (2002) Nursing theory and concept development or analysis, applying phenomenography in nursing research. J Adv Nurs 40(3):339–345
Souleles N, Savva S, Watters H, Annesley A, Bull B (2014) A phenomenographic investigation on the use of iPads among undergraduate art and design students. Br J Edu Technol. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12132
Taylor C, Cope CJ (2007) Are there educationally critical aspects in the concept of evolution? In: Proceedings of UniServe, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Trigwell K (2000) A phenomenographic interview on phenomenography. In: Bowden JA, Walsh E (eds) Phenomenography. Qualitative research methods series. RMIT University Press, Melbourne, pp 62–82
Unesco Sustainable Development Goal Four targets. https://en.unesco.org/education2030-sdg4/targets
Williamson B (2015) Educating the smart city: schooling smart citizens through computational urbanism. Big Data Soc. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951715617783
Yates C, Partridge H, Bruce C (2012) Exploring information experiences through phenomenography. Libr Inf Res 36(11):96
Zoltowski CB, Oakes WC, Cardella ME (2012) Students’ ways of experiencing human-centered design. J Eng Educ 101(1):28–59