Carmel McNaught

A global perspective on building opportunities for all students:opportunities for all students:

Experiences in Africa, Australia & Hong KongCreative commons license

1

2

Role of a keynote speech

to stir things up … which

i ht tmight overturn ideas & beliefs

t l to explore some underlying assumptions &assumptions & concepts

http://londoncoder.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/iceberg.jpg 3

Essence and detailEssence and detail … You will see & hear different things in this talk

d di T&L b li f ddepending on your T&L beliefs and your experience.

Core principles areCore principles are transferrable.

Details? Maybe or maybeDetails? Maybe or maybe not …

http://tinyurl.com/2flmbwh 4

Outline A potted personal history across 4 phases Spatial and temporal contexts Lessons learnt on the journey Phase 5: ??

First, let’s begin with a little social media …First, let s begin with a little social media …

5

Shifts in geographical culturesPhase 1Phase 1

Phase 2

6Shifts in disciplinary cultures

Shifts in geographical cultures

Phase 3

Phase 4

http://www.slhs.us/home/180002483/180002483/images/P1020594 JPG02483/images/P1020594.JPG

7Shifts in disciplinary cultures

Socio-political contextual factorsSocio political contextual factors

Ph 1 A t li i th 1970 (Vi t Phase 1: Australia in the 1970s (Vietnam war, Labour government, end of ‘white Australia’)

Phase 2: Africa in the late 1970s/ 1980s (war Phase 2: Africa in the late 1970s/ 1980s (war, apartheid, democracy, AIDS)

Phase 3: Australia in the 1990s (indigenous Phase 3: Australia in the 1990s (indigenous rights, return of Liberal government, gun control)

Phase 4: Hong Kong in the 21st century Phase 4: Hong Kong in the 21st century (relationship to Mainland China, economy, SARS))

8

Are these shifts transitions or dislocations?

L ? E li h Z l C tLanguage? English, Zulu, Cantonese … Sapir-Whorf (linguistic relativity) or Chomsky

(universal grammar)?(universal grammar)?My view: ‘Truth’ resides in the tension between

opposing polesopposing poles

9http://discoveringmandarin.blogspot.com/2009/07/pan-ku-pan-gu-vs-lao-tzu-chinese.html

Examples from Zulu/ EnglishEnglish term Zulu definition Literal translation Commentsammonia umuthi ongumoya

oxutshwe ngamanzi onephunga elihlabayo; NH

poison that is air mixed with water with smell that is piercing

A functional rather than structural definition

NH3compound inhlanganisela yazithako

zemvelo ezimbilithe intermixing of mixtures of nature which are two

Confusion between compounds and mixtures. The use of ‘nature’ and ‘two’.

density ukuminyana; isikalosesisindo nomthamo

the concentrate; the measure of mass and volume

No indication of ratio at all

energy amandla okwenza umsebenzi

power to do work No distinction between ‘power’ and ‘energy’umsebenzi power and energy

ultra-sound umsindo ongabekezekeleki ngenxa yobukhulu

noise not tolerated because of loudness

Confusion between loudness and frequency

McNaught (1992)

10http://citizenwire.com/2010/04/12/ctw2099_054802.php

Remember that most of us are …Remember that most of us are …

WEIRD

11

Remember that most of us are …Remember that most of us are …

WEIRDOur cultural background is … Western Educated Industrialized, Rich, Democratic

Image extracted from Spinney (2010), p. 42

12

Three-stage conceptual change model

DATA

1 E id f th d f h

DATA

1. Evidence of the need for change2. Confronting/ negotiating the situationg g g3. Reconstruction of a new approach

PEOPLE

E L i (1952)E.g. Lewin (1952); Nussbaum & Novick (1982)

Examples from Chinese(s)/ EnglishExamples from Chinese(s)/ English Singular/ plural Prepositions Tense (esp. conditional) Passive vs active sentences

14

How important are these differences pfor learning?

C iti l d?Cognitive load?Motivation aspects?

G l i i h i ?Greater or lesser insights into nuance?How does diversity in a class influence

t ?outcomes?What about classroom interactions?

15

Is it such Thanks to Clayton R Wright

a shift?

16http://cdn3.ioffer.com/img/item/140/405/147/ViRp.jpg http://school20.ning.com/photo/595650:Photo:4821?context=latest

But what Thanks to Clayton R Wright

about this?

http://www.slhs.us/home/180002483/180002483/images/P1020594.JPG

17http://cdn3.ioffer.com/img/item/140/405/147/ViRp.jpghttp://www.mcg.edu/itss/networking/images/student-at-computer.jpg

Information access The passive

Constructive dialogue

pChinese student? Constructive dialogue

How eLearning strategies are being used at

student?

g g gpresent. Student data from 21 university courses in HK. ~600+ q’aires.

Kember, McNaught, Chong, Lam, & Cheng (2010)

18

, g ( )

Design of website

19CFA models Learning

outcomes

Implications for the meaning of digital literacy

Active eLearningeLearning

SEM model

20

Information access

Constructive dialogueConstructive dialogue

Students considered that using features whichStudents considered that using features which promote constructive dialogue and interactive learning activities encourages a deep approach to learning, the development of communication skills and enhanced understanding of content.

21

We now use the term ‘l i d i ’‘learning designs’

Student learning gneeds

Aims/ desired

CUHK T&L policy

reflectiondesired learning

outcomes

Content/ fundamental

concepts

Learning activities

Feedback for

evaluation

Assessment of learning

22

Actual learning

outcomes

Universal decision questions

Student learning needs

Aims/ desired learning

outcomesUniversal decision questions

Who are my students?

outcomes

Content/ fundamental

concepts

Learning activities

Feedback for

evaluation

Who are my students?Why am I teaching this … ?Which content ? In what form ? How much ?

Assessment

Actual learning

outcomes

Which content ? In what form ? How much ?Who finds it ?

Relationship between online and F2F ?Relationship between online and F2F ?Getting feedback to Ss on their learning ?Getting feedback to Ts on Ss’ learning ?g g Is this learning going to last ? Can I do this better ?

23

These ideas fit with l t di T&L d llong-standing T&L models

E.g. Laurillard’s (1993, 2002) conversational model– between student(s) and teacher(s)– between the students– about the content

focused on concepts/– focused on concepts/ conceptions

– about tasks/ assessments– about artifacts produced– etc.

24http://dumais.us/newtown/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/conversation.jpg

Diagnostic

Media-enriched explanations -

produced by teachers or students

Activities, e.g. discussions, quizzes, games, simulations,

debates, roleplays, etc.

DiscussionTeacher's conceptual knowledge

Student's conceptual knowledge

Diagnostic testing/ info. on learning prefs

A range of communication & collaboration

opportunities with other

Reflection on student

Reflection on

knowledge knowledge

Revision of learning

Revision of personal Peer reviews,

tests exams

opportunities with other students

Student's actions

work interactions

Teacher's

strategiesideastests, exams

Reflective spaces,Interaction in/ perception of

T&L environment conception of

learning design

Reflective spaces, e.g. blogs, ePortfolios

Feedback for evaluation

Assignments, presentations

25After Laurillard 1993, 2002

Teachers are individuals with different beliefs

& practicesBain & McNaught (2006)Bain & McNaught (2006)

22 cases of AustralianAustralian academics using technology-enhanced teaching

26

teaching

BELIEFS Chemistry

Origin of KnowledgeAcademic/discipline 2 3 4

Student/collaborat iondiscipline collaborat ion

Pedagogical Philosophy Instructivist 2 3 4 Constructivist

Type of UnderstandingKnowingmore

2 3 4Knowing

differentlyR l f Di i I id t l 2 3 4 C t l Role of Discussion Incidental 2 3 4 Central Accommodation of

Students’ ConceptionsAbsent

Pre-emptive

Conversat ional-Assimilative

Conversat ional-Accommodative

Curriculum Progression Linear/ Hierarchical Jigsaw Spiral

Curriculum FocusKnowledge +Understanding

Disciplinary waysof knowing

Professional/ Artisticperforming

PRACTICES Task Structure High 2 3 4 Low

Interactivity Navigat ional 2 3 4Manipulative/

Constructive

Learning ControlTeachermanaged

2 3 4Student

managed Accommodation of

Individual DifferencesNon- existent 2 3 4 Multifaceted

Metacognitive support Unsupported 2 3 4 Integrated Learning Process Reproduction 2 3 4 Construction Learning Framework Structured Guided Facilitated Learning Focus Knowledge Reasoning Performance

BELIEFS Chemistry Architecture

Origin of KnowledgeAcademic/discipline 2 3 4

Student/collaborat iondiscipline collaborat ion

Pedagogical Philosophy Instructivist 2 3 4 Constructivist

Type of UnderstandingKnowingmore

2 3 4Knowing

differentlyR l f Di i I id t l 2 3 4 C t l Role of Discussion Incidental 2 3 4 Central Accommodation of

Students’ ConceptionsAbsent

Pre-emptive

Conversat ional-Assimilative

Conversat ional-Accommodative

Curriculum Progression Linear/ Hierarchical Jigsaw Spiral

Curriculum FocusKnowledge +Understanding

Disciplinary waysof knowing

Professional/ Artisticperforming

PRACTICES Task Structure High 2 3 4 Low

Interactivity Navigat ional 2 3 4Manipulative/

Constructive

Learning ControlTeachermanaged

2 3 4Student

managed Accommodation of

Individual DifferencesNon- existent 2 3 4 Multifaceted

Metacognitive support Unsupported 2 3 4 Integrated Learning Process Reproduction 2 3 4 Construction Learning Framework Structured Guided Facilitated Learning Focus Knowledge Reasoning Performance

BELIEFS Chemistry Architecture

Origin of KnowledgeAcademic/discipline 2 3 4

Student/collaborat iondiscipline collaborat ion

Pedagogical Philosophy Instructivist 2 3 4 Constructivist

Type of UnderstandingKnowingmore

2 3 4Knowing

differentlyR l f Di i I id t l 2 3 4 C t l Role of Discussion Incidental 2 3 4 Central Accommodation of

Students’ ConceptionsAbsent

Pre-emptive

Conversat ional-Assimilative

Conversat ional-Accommodative

Curriculum Progression Linear/ Hierarchical Jigsaw Spiral

Curriculum FocusKnowledge +Understanding

Disciplinary waysof knowing

Professional/ Artisticperforming

PRACTICES Task Structure High 2 3 4 Low

Interactivity Navigat ional 2 3 4Manipulative/

Constructive

Learning ControlTeachermanaged

2 3 4Student

managed Accommodation of

Individual DifferencesNon- existent 2 3 4 Multifaceted

Metacognitive support Unsupported 2 3 4 Integrated Learning Process Reproduction 2 3 4 Construction Learning Framework Structured Guided Facilitated Learning Focus Knowledge Reasoning Performance

BELIEFS Chemistry Law Architecture

Origin of KnowledgeAcademic/discipline 2 3 4

Student/collaborat iondiscipline collaborat ion

Pedagogical Philosophy Instructivist 2 3 4 Constructivist

Type of UnderstandingKnowingmore

2 3 4Knowing

differentlyR l f Di i I id t l 2 3 4 C t l Role of Discussion Incidental 2 3 4 Central Accommodation of

Students’ ConceptionsAbsent

Pre-emptive

Conversat ional-Assimilative

Conversat ional-Accommodative

Curriculum Progression Linear/ Hierarchical Jigsaw Spiral

Curriculum FocusKnowledge +Understanding

Disciplinary waysof knowing

Professional/ Artisticperforming

PRACTICES Task Structure High 2 3 4 Low

Interactivity Navigat ional 2 3 4Manipulative/

Constructive

Learning ControlTeachermanaged

2 3 4Student

managed Accommodation of

Individual DifferencesNon- existent 2 3 4 Multifaceted

Metacognitive support Unsupported 2 3 4 Integrated Learning Process Reproduction 2 3 4 Construction Learning Framework Structured Guided Facilitated Learning Focus Knowledge Reasoning Performance

2010 Horizon Report:C iti l h ll

The role of the academy – and the way we prepare students for their future lives is

Critical challenges

prepare students for their future lives – is changing.

New scholarly forms of authoring, publishing, and researching continue to emerge but appropriate metrics for evaluating them increasingly and far too often lag behind.

Digital media literacy continues its rise in importance as a key skill in every discipline and profession. http://wp.nmc.org/horizon2010/and profession.

Institutions increasingly focus more narrowly on key goals, as a result of shrinking budgets in the present economic climatein the present economic climate.

31Johnson, Levine, Smith, & Stone (2010)

21st C LiteraciesPhase 5 21 C LiteraciesVisual

Literacy

CulturalLiteracy

yNetworkLiteracy

GlobalLiteracy 2121STST CCENTURYENTURY

ComputerLiteracyLLITERACIESITERACIES

LinguisticLiteracy Written

Literacy

MediaLibrar MediaLiteracy

LibraryLiteracy

After blogs.ubc.ca/dean/files/2009/02/bloom1.gif

Web 3.0 ?“the smart read-write Mobile Web”

interconnected

user

published content

user generated

content

http://web2.socialcomputingmagazine.com/

2010 …???

Lots happening …H hi ?How can we achieve convergence ?

New tools New contextsNewNew

opportunitiesOngoing g g

principles to guide us on this journey …

34http://www.parkenet.org/jp/challenges/convergence.jpg

SummarySummaryThemes: Negotiate educational beliefs in each situation Focus on the details of learning design Consider the importance of relevant and

authentic tasks that enable learners to develop lif l l i d i bilitilifelong learning and earning capabilities

Accommodate shifting roles of both teachers and learners in a mutual comfort zonelearners in a mutual comfort zone

Enjoy the experience!

35

The future is the next generation …http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Children_in_Namibia%281_cropped%29.jpg

January 2011

36http://www.chinawikipedia.com/chinapeople.html

Thank YouThank YouThank YouThank You

37

Bain, J. D., & McNaught, C. (2006). How academics use technology in teaching and learning: Understanding the relationship between beliefs and practice. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(2), 99–113.

Johnson, L., Levine, A., Smith, R., & Stone, S. (2010). The 2010 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.Texas: The New Media Consortium.

Kember, D., McNaught, C., Chong, F. C. Y., Lam, P., & Cheng, K. F. (2010). Understanding the ways in which design features of educational websites impact upon student learning outcomes in blended learning environments. Computers & Education, 55 1183–119255, 1183–1192.

Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: a conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. (2nd ed.). London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Lewin, K. (1952). Group decision and social change. In G. E. Swanson, T. M. Newcomb & ( ) ( )& F. E. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 459–473). New York: Holt.

McNaught, C. (1992). Learning science at the interface between Zulu and English: An overview of research issues. The South African Journal of Linguistics, 10(4), 234–239.

Nussbaum, J. & Novick, S. (1982). Alternative frameworks, conceptual conflict andNussbaum, J. & Novick, S. (1982). Alternative frameworks, conceptual conflict and accommodation: Toward a principled teaching strategy. Instructional Science, 11, 183–200.

Spinney, L. (2010, 13 November). Who’s the oddball? New Scientist, No. 2786, 40–43.

38