zaterdag 11 augustus 2007

Case study: Blended learning through interuniversity collaborative interaction

Presenters:

Dr. Beatriz Fainhole &
Dr. Norma Scagnoli

website: http://www.cediproe.org.ar/

Objectives
  • To present the blended learning initiative
  • To describe the design and implementation processes
  • To discuss the strengths and weaknesses of vertual collaboration
  • To reflect and discuss the lessons learned.

Blended learning

  • Blended learning defined as a planned combination of teaching approaches that include a diversity of media, online and face-to-face teaching strategies, in order to improve the teaching and learning mediated processes.

Details of Collaboration

  • Yr 1 Upload unmodified content to CMS (Moodle)
    Strategy that served familiarization and socialization process with system and among collaborators
  • Yr 2 New curriculum by competences, changes in Inst Design
    Guide to instructionaldesign of blended learning
    New content and new strategies
  • Yr 3 Pedagogical practices for blended learning.
    Deepen collaborative exchange
    Enhance cognitive and meta cognitive skills
    Help knowledge building (distributed and situated aproaches)
    Technology was not the focus of this year's work however it was not invisible and its presence could not be ignored.

Strengths and weaknesses tools for virtual collaboration

  • Communicative rationale based on respect and negotiation processes
  • Communication: Weekly at the beginning, once or twice a month as project progressed
  • Systems (Synch) MSN messenger / Skype / phone; (Asynch) e-mail, discussion forum.
  • Strengths: easy access, user friendly, freee voice and video enabled.
  • Weaknesses: personal limitations, technology literacy, hw. and sw. issues, broadband issues.

Reflection and lessons learned (collaboration)

From the remote collaboration process:

Positive findings

  • Inter-institutional dialogue and common framework
  • International social and academic interaction
  • Shift to open dialogue (Importance of social, cultural and linguistic features)
  • Understanding of lack of unified definitions for b-learning
  • Facility ot overcome misunderstandings in communication

Limitations

  • Contiuous availability of research prtners in the 4 yr period
  • Demands of log term projects without institutional support
  • Multiple interpretations of the concept of b-learning.

Geen opmerkingen: