Supporting online collaboration for design

1: The factors that encourage online collaboration

Mark Childs

Senior Research Fellow, Coventry University

AMORES Project

Five schools

• Skaegkaerschool in Silkeborg, Denmark• Horvati Primary school in Zagreb, Croatia• Primary School ABiS - School4Child in Lodz,

Poland • Karlbergsskolan in Köping, Sweden• St. Mary’s Catholic Primary, in Newcastle-

under-Lyme, Staffordshire,

Aim

• Encourage a love for literature through the creation of digital artefacts

• Two technologies focused on for creation– Videos (PowerPoint, Prezi, Slidemaker, keynote)

(iMovie, Moviemaker) (Animoto, Tiki-Toki, Photobooth)

– Comic Strip generators (Lego Storyteller, various online eg Makebeliefs, ToonDoo, Witty Comics)

– Statistics-based card game “Top Trumps”

Why creation?

Evaluating

Analysing

Applying

Understanding

Remembering

CreatingRevised Bloom’s taxonomy

Online collaboration for design

Learning through design has two essential features:• learners construct meaning through the act of

design – constructivism• collaborative learning - meaning is constructed

jointly by a community – social constructivism• Combined in constructionism – Papert –

blends cognitivist and situative strategies

So online social tools key too

• Edmodo for asynchronous sharing• Skype or Connect for synchronous link• DK use Facebook, PL use videoconference

“In England in particular where we have legislation about social networking and things like that. I know it’s a secure server but I still think that’s a big concern, even though it’s in an educational setting. It’s something we need to look into before we can say for definitely. “

Professional ethos

Completion of tasks to

time

Greater trust

Reliance on other

alignments diminishes

Greater co-operation

Lack of professional

ethos

Failure to complete

tasks to time

Diminishing trust

Greater reliance on

other alignments

Reduced commitment

to collaboration

Virtual teams (Lin, Standing and Liu)

CommunicationCohesion/

relationship building

Coordination Performance Satisfaction

Third pedagogical theory: storytelling

Predictions

• Artefacts creation• Synchronous communication• Asynchronous sharing and mashing (the

aesthetic interaction)

• So … any tips?

Further information

http://www.amores-project.eu/Email mark.childs@coventry.ac.ukFlickr https://

www.flickr.com/photos/amoresproject

References• Bloom’s digital taxonomy: Andrew Churches, (2008) Bloom's Taxonomy Blooms

Digitally, Tech & Learning, 4th Jan, 2008 http://www.techlearning.com/studies-in-ed-tech/0020/blooms-taxonomy-blooms-digitally/44988

• Experiential learning cycle: Kolb, D.A. (1984) Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. P. 24

• Trust cycles: Soetanto, R., Childs, M., Poh, P., Austin, S and Hao, J. (2014) Virtual collaborative learning for building design, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law 167 February 2014 Issue MP1, Pages 25–34

• Virtual Teams: Lin, C., Standing, C. & Liu, Y. 2008, "A model to develop effective virtual teams", Decision Support Systems, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 1031-1045.

• Storytelling model: Sheherezade Consortium (2011) Sheherazade, 1001 stories for adult learning Theoretical background for methodology: summary, http://www.sheherazade.eu/sites/default/files/deliverable/d3/deliverable3_EN.pdf