single versus multiple contextualization in e-learning environments yavuz akpınar*, Özlem Şengül...
Post on 03-Jan-2016
Embed Size (px)
Fall of contextualization in e-learning and separating learning context from others
Single versus multiple contextualization in e-learning environments
Yavuz Akpnar*, zlem engl+ & Ekrem Kutbay**Boazii University, +Bahcesehir University, Istanbul Turkeyakpinar@boun.edu.tr Budapest
This research is supported by Boazii University BAP with a grant number 14D02P1:8384CONTEXTas the whole situation, background or environment relevant to a particular event (Tessmer & Richey, 1997; p.87)
Multiple contexts (work, street, school, and lab) may provide grounds for a learning experience.
A context helps students to remember both formal and informal experiences, and prior learning. Hence it functions as cognitive strategies applicable to a study task.Context and meaningDonaldson (1978) conceived a context as a meaningful situation which may be used a catalyzer of the process of acting and thinking. Khler (1947), ones perception of an organized situation is considered as a coherent whole; the whole determines the meaning of the constituting elements.
Vygotsky (1978) activity in a context is critical, because activity integrates human actions in a coherent whole, and provides a foundation for meaningful engagements
Marton and Booth (1997) argued the context from a phenomenographic approach stating that learning is always based on experiencing a situation and discerning relevant phenomena from that situation (p.202). Context based instruction labeled with different names; for instance theme based instruction (Dirkx & Prenger, 1997), embedded instruction (Simpson et al., 1997), situated cognition (Greeno, 1998), infused instruction (Perin, 2001), authentic learning (Murphy, Lunn & Jones, 2006), microworld based learning (Papert, 1980), anchored instruction (Bottge et al., 2007), inquiry based teaching (Rogers, 2007) and contextualized instruction (Wisely, 2009) Types of Context in Learning Environments
Fall of contextualization in technology based learning environments
Web based material development; design and development of context based material for the web was more difficult than context-free material.
Learning object (LO) approach: LO developers were asked to develop material free of context so that the LO may be adapted or integrated into different learning units and different content areas where it is appropriate.
Time: It is time consuming to develop learning activities in different contexts for CBL environments considering.
Transferring responsibility to teachers: Many developers left the responsibility of contextualizing the learning content to the human tutors/students.
Difficulty of contextualizing abstract contents: It may be an easy task to contextualize concrete knowledge patterns, however there are many learning units covering abstract patterns for which finding controllable real-world events and tools may be difficult, particularly in e- and m-learning settings.
in considering contextualization of a learning contentThe followings should be considered:
Situate the content into a familiar context (context)
Provide goals achievable in a given context (goal)
Develop tasks to be handled in a given context (task)
Deliver reflective feedback in the context at which student is active (feedback)
Sequence activities in a way that they all support each other to ease understanding (organization).
Organize task sets and feedback components in order to respond to individual learning requirements in a dynamic cycle pattern (revision cycle)
Research Problem This research explored the design and implementation of single and multiple context use in two different CBL environments for the learning unit, logic.Single context
Your task is prepare a report of what astronaut Ali did and did not. In your report, you should code correct events using 1, and incorrect events using 0. Use the photographs given to find what Ali did and did notMultiple context
Data Anaylsis_1GroupsnPre testPost testlearning gainmeanSDmeanSDmeanSDA403,2501,5146,4502,6013,2002,802B413,4391,5004,0731,941,6342,527C402,8251,6773,3252,055,5002,470D303,1671,6416,1002,0402,9332,242Tablo : Pretest, posttest and learning gain scoresGroupsLearning environment typeACourseware with multiple context and teacher supportBCourseware with single contextCConventional activities (control group)DCourseware with single context and teacher supportData analysis -2Learning gainSum of squaresdfSquares meanFSig.Between groups239,625379,87512,415,000Within groups945,7791476,434sum1185,404150Table: ANOVA for differences between group meansLearning gainGroupGroupMean differenceStandard errorpAB2,565*,563,000AC2,700*,567,000AD,266,6121,000BC,134,5631,000BD-2,299*,609,001CD-2,433*,612,001Table: Bonferroni testiGroupsLearning environment typeACourseware with multiple context and teacher supportBCourseware with single contextCConventional activities (control group)DCourseware with single context and teacher supportTypes of Context in Learning Environments
Content organization in single contextContent organization in multiple context