Pedagogic Planning Tools and Effective Design for Learning Liz Masterman Oxford University Computing Services Marion Manton Department of Continuing Education, University of Oxford

Overview Planning: the impact of technology Pedagogic planning tools  The design challenge  Examples of tools  Phoebe: design rationale and quick tour Reflections: promoting Design for Learning

Technology as a driver for (re-)planning “E-learning is often talked about as a ‘trojan mouse,’ which teachers let into their practice without realizing that it will require them to rethink not just how they use particular hardware or software, but all of what they do.” (Sharpe & Oliver, 2007, p. 49) “It fundamentally made me think about what I actually do in the class. … The VLE really made me think about ‘how am I going to project what it is that I give to a lesson when I’m face to face on this screen?’ … Usually I don’t have to plan my lessons, I just go in and do it … What it brought me back to was the actual lesson plan, you know, like when you first started off … it was like that all over again.” (School teacher)

Planning as a means to “scaffold” technology use “Technology-reticent” practitioners:  Lack of awareness or interest  “Technophobia”  Lack of time to explore (esp. if part-time or hourly paid)  Aversion to risk inherent in experimentation  Fear of being supplanted  Incompatibility with institutional model of learning But pressure to engage with digital technology  From above Implementation of VLE Use of technology as a criterion in performance assessment  From below Student expectations How to engage the technology-reticent?  Institutional staff-development initiatives…  …mediated by pedagogic planning tools

Enter the pedagogic planning tool… =Where the individual practitioner starts getting to grips with technology and exploring its implications An emergent genre:  JISC Design for Learning programme (2 projects), DialogPlus, ReMath, LAMS  Guide teachers through the construction of plans for learning sessions that make appropriate, and effective, use of technology Pedagogic planning:  Concept of “lesson” alien to HE  Pedagogy “embraces an essential dialogue between teaching and learning” (Beetham & Sharpe, 2007, p. 2)

The design challenge: Range of approaches “The starting point would be the assessment criteria/expected learning outcomes. This would be balanced by the students’ needs and level of learning. I would also take into account the type of students […] The environment can affect what can be done in a session e.g. availability of breakout rooms, space for group work etc. Time of day can be important. […] Available resources would also be considered.” “I often go out for a run to clear my head to let the creative juices start to flow. […] depending on what course it is (some are looser than others), I usually start by thinking about the knowledge or skills learners need, whilst keeping a strong eye on the assessment. This then develops into aims and outcomes. I liken the process to painting a picture… you don’t start at one particular point but move from one part to another. Each development affects the other parts.”

The design challenge:Tools to mediate the design process “I use pen and paper to collect ideas, Post-its to sort main headings. I like to lecture from a hand-written outline.” “1. Pen and paper — broad conceptual overview, key learning activities mapped as a storyboard/concept map. 2. Formalise this map in Word or PowerPoint. 3. Detailed matrix of [learning outcomes], activities and assessment in Excel for detailed analysis etc.”

The design challenge: Range of representations

The design challenge summarised “Maybe it’s going to be difficult to develop a single software tool kit that suits everybody’s preferences for planning learning (paper based, software or a mixture of both!) and maybe it could be useful to develop flexible software tools that support teachers through the ‘process’ and stages of designing for learning…” (Teacher in HE)

Responses to the challenge: pedagogic planning tools DialogPlus London Knowledge Lab ReMath LAMS Phoebe

DialogPlus: Planning with adaptive help

London Pedagogy Planner: planning at two levels

ReMath: flexible form-filling for hierarchical plans

LAMS: Template sequences

Phoebe: Focus on guidance; flexibility in choice of tool Aim:  Enable teachers in post-compulsory education to develop their confidence and skills in designing technology-mediated learning experiences Principles:  Propagate effective practice to a wide audience  Allow option to use familiar planning tools Rationale:  Learning Design tools and LAMS in limited use; output XML  Successful IT projects build on the way users work, don’t force them to adapt

Informant design methodology Involve representatives of the e-learning community where their contribution will be of the most value (Scaife & Rogers, 1999) Practitioner-informants: requirements gathering, scenarios of use, initial design  5 Higher Education  2 Further Education  2 Adult & community learning, work-based learning JISC Experts’ group: confirmation of design decisions Becta and HEA: embedding, sustainability

The Phoebe prototype Phase 1: proof-of-concept tool Open source, built on wiki technology Supports planning for individual learning sessions made up of learning activities Envisaged context of use  Initial teacher training  Staff development Functions  Reference tool: guidance, advice and examples  Planning a learning session

Phoebe: Evaluation of Phase 1 prototype Very positive response from practitioners to overall vision Saw applicability in context of initial teacher training and staff development programmes Not sure if it would work as a self-teaching aid for “lone” practitioners who wish to explore D4L The guidance and examples appear to meet practitioners’ needs In its present form it functions better as a resource with a note-taking facility than as a usable and useful tool for creating lesson plans There is considerable interest in the potential of Phoebe as a customisable community-owned tool

Future directions: Phoebe phase 2 Redesign and develop functionality Expand the content Explore Phoebe as a community-owned tool  Ensure relevance to users through customisation  A way to tackle long-term sustainability Managing the content in the future  Centrally managed version?  Institutional versions?  Open to all (Wikipedia style)? Integration with other planner tools Consider the future research agenda for planner tools

Reflections: Promoting D4L through pedagogic planners Definitions “ designing, planning, orchestrating and supporting learning activities as part of a learning session or programme ” (Beetham 2004) “the process by which teachers – and others involved in the support of learning – arrive at a plan or structure or design for a learning situation” (Beetham & Sharp 2007, p.7) Learning Design is about formalising learning experiences in activity sequences and “playing” them on dedicated Learning Design tools. Design for learning is about activity-centred teaching and learning that uses any kind of technology, so broader than LD - and more problematic to encapsulate?

What do we want D4L to be? Manifesto? Policy? Programme? Movement? Book? But above all, a change in teachers’ perspective…

So, a PP needs to reinforce that… “design” simultaneously involves the application of “systematic principles and methods” and is “a creative activity that cannot be fully reduced to standard steps” (Winograd, 1996, pp. xx, xxii) “learning can never be wholly designed, only designed for (i.e. planned in advance) with an awareness of the contingent nature of learning as it actually takes place” (Beetham & Sharpe, 2007, p.8) “pedagogic research and practitioner education converge on the ideal of active, constructive learners carrying out relevant tasks to progress towards their own learning goals” (Beetham 2004)

In other words… Both this… Images from …and this jo-remy-iconic-dutch-designer/

To design for learning experiences that are… …preferably not like this… …but more like this