1. Reusing Learning Objects: Pedagogical goals direct resource choices for first year chemistry labs Cyprien Lomas and Joanne Nakonechny The Science Centre for Learning and Teaching (Skylight) University of British Columbia, Canada

2. What is a Learning Object? A (very) loose description of a learning object: A reusable, digital resource –Reusable in different contexts –What about in similar contexts?

3. Discipline Setting American Chemical Society;Canadian Society for Chemistry Biennial Conference on Chemical Education ChemCONF mailing list, online conferences Journal of Chemical Education Project: Academic Committee for the Creative Use of Learning Technologies (ACCULT) creation of a mixed-mode course for 1 st year chemistry laboratories annual enrolment of approximately 1800-2000 students Learning Object Approaches: technological or pedagogical

4. Pedagogical Process Deep vs surface learning Deep structure learning focuses on concepts not facts = surface structure Deep structure learning is difficult for novice learners Authentic scholars at any university level requires confidence based on deep structure knowledge How does this influence choice of LOs?

5. The chemistry students need to be able to: identify a problem find information in the literature pose scientific questions formulate a hypothesis design experiments to test the hypothesis learn new experimental techniques analyze data & drawing conclusions recognize safety issues Learning Objects need to reflect key goals of the course:

6. Transformation BEFORE: 11 labs per term step-by-step method learning by repetition RESULTS: good technical skills poor connection between application and outcomes AFTER: 6 labs per term guided inquiry learning through concepts RESULTS: poorer technical skills good connection between application and outcomes

7. How did we get there?

9. Elements for Selecting Learning Objects Pedagogical goals Object granularity Rigidity continuum Author control Concept articulated Type (text, image etc.) Data object User response LO Pedagogical goals Rigidity continuum Author control Concept articulated Type (text, image etc.) Data object User response LO

10. Customizable parameters can be partially modified Commercial or open- source VL, WebCT (container) Flexible parameters can be completely modified shared Lab manual (malleable) Rigid parameters cannot be modified Bridging to the Lab (product) calculator (prescriptive) Selecting/Developing Learning Objects Rigidity Continuum Author Control

11. Process: Development of an experimental methodology. Visualization of multi-step sequences. Tool aids by using: Theory + method + guided application RIGID Bridging to the Lab Object granularity Author control Concept articulated Data object User response LO Pedagogical goals Rigidity continuum Author control Concept articulated Type (text, image etc.) Data object User response LO

12. Process: Development of an experimental methodology. Implementation of multi-step sequences. Tool aids by connecting: Theory + method + independent application. (tutorial required) CUSTOMIZABLE Virtual Lab Object granularity Author control Concept articulated Data object User response LO Pedagogical goals Rigidity continuum Author control Concept articulated Type (text, image etc.) Data object User response LO

13. Additional Support: In-house technique modules Glossary Tool aids by connecting: Students to the actual laboratory FLEXIBLE Glossary Object granularity Author control Concept articulated Data object User response LO Pedagogical goals Rigidity continuum Author control Concept articulated Type (text, image etc.) Data object User response LO

14. Lessons Learned Pedagogical goals Author control User response Data object Type Rigidity continuum Object granularity Concept articulated

15. Reuse within a discipline It ain’t easy. Need to keep the pedagogical goals in mind when choosing Learning Objects. It’s time consuming. It took two years to put together the course. May need to change the style and function of other course resources. We re-wrote the lab manual, wrote instructional resources, developed quizzes etc. It’s on-going. We’re still developing resources, re-writing resources, finding new learning objects. Would we do it again? YES!

16. Development Team: Dr. Sophia Nussbaum (Director) Dr. Matt Le Page Dr. Cyprien Lomas (Skylight) Dr. Joanne Nakonechny (Skylight) Students: –Alexei Polishchuk –Zev Thompson Illustrations: –Elizabeth Varty Librarian: –Kevin Lindstrom THANK YOU TO THE UBC ACADEMIC COMMITTEE FOR THE CREATIVE USE OF LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES FOR THEIR SUPPORT (ACCULT).