Search

The Mod4L Models of Practice project is part of the JISC-funded Design for Learning Programme. It ran from 1 May – 31 December 2006. The philosophy underlying the project was that a general split is evident in the e-learning community between development of e-learning tools, services and standards, and research into how teachers can use these most effectively, and is impeding uptake of new tools and methods by teachers. To help overcome this barrier and bridge the gap, a need is felt for practitioner-focused resources which describe a range of learning designs and offer guidance on how these may be chosen and applied, how they can support effective practice in design for learning, and how they can support the development of effective tools, standards and systems with a learning design capability (see, for example, Griffiths and Blat 2005, JISC 2006). Practice models, it was suggested, were such a resource. The aim of the project was to: develop a range of practice models that could be used by practitioners in real life contexts and have a high impact on improving teaching and learning practice. We worked with two definitions of practice models. Practice models are: 1. generic approaches to the structuring and orchestration of learning activities. They express elements of pedagogic principle and allow practitioners to make informed choices (JISC 2006) However, however effective a learning design may be, it can only be shared with others through a representation. The issue of representation of learning designs is, then, central to the concept of sharing and reuse at the heart of JISC’s Design for Learning programme. Thus practice models should be both representations of effective practice, and effective representations of practice. Hence we arrived at the project working definition of practice models as: 2. Common, but decontextualised, learning des

LLiDA set out to:  review the evidence of change in the contexts of learning, including the nature of work,nknowledge, social life and citizenship, communications media and other technologies  review current responses to these challenges from the further and higher education sectors, in terms of: a) the kinds of capabilities valued, taught for and assessed (especially as revealed through competence frameworks); b) the ways in which capabilities are supported ('provision') c) the value placed on staff and student 'literacies of the digital'  collect original data concerning current practice in literacies provision in UK FE and HE, including 15 institutional audits and over 40 examples of forward thinking practice  offer conclusions and recommendations, in terms of the same issues reviewed in 2

LLiDA set out to:  review the evidence of change in the contexts of learning, including the nature of work,nknowledge, social life and citizenship, communications media and other technologies  review current responses to these challenges from the further and higher education sectors, in terms of: a) the kinds of capabilities valued, taught for and assessed (especially as revealed through competence frameworks); b) the ways in which capabilities are supported ('provision') c) the value placed on staff and student 'literacies of the digital'  collect original data concerning current practice in literacies provision in UK FE and HE, including 15 institutional audits and over 40 examples of forward thinking practice  offer conclusions and recommendations, in terms of the same issues reviewed in 2

The Mod4L Models of Practice project is part of the JISC-funded Design for Learning Programme. It ran from 1 May – 31 December 2006. The philosophy underlying the project was that a general split is evident in the e-learning community between development of e-learning tools, services and standards, and research into how teachers can use these most effectively, and is impeding uptake of new tools and methods by teachers. To help overcome this barrier and bridge the gap, a need is felt for practitioner-focused resources which describe a range of learning designs and offer guidance on how these may be chosen and applied, how they can support effective practice in design for learning, and how they can support the development of effective tools, standards and systems with a learning design capability (see, for example, Griffiths and Blat 2005, JISC 2006). Practice models, it was suggested, were such a resource. The aim of the project was to: develop a range of practice models that could be used by practitioners in real life contexts and have a high impact on improving teaching and learning practice. We worked with two definitions of practice models. Practice models are: 1. generic approaches to the structuring and orchestration of learning activities. They express elements of pedagogic principle and allow practitioners to make informed choices (JISC 2006) However, however effective a learning design may be, it can only be shared with others through a representation. The issue of representation of learning designs is, then, central to the concept of sharing and reuse at the heart of JISC’s Design for Learning programme. Thus practice models should be both representations of effective practice, and effective representations of practice. Hence we arrived at the project working definition of practice models as: 2. Common, but decontextualised, learning des

Introduction: the future for learners' experiences The opening paragraphs of any recent policy documents are a testimony to the recognised importance of e-learning in education. As the case studies in this book also attest, e-learning models and theories, simulations, computer modelling and social software are now an integral part of most learners' experience and environment. Similarly, institutions now recognise the strategic importance of ICT and have central policies in place to ensure that there is a technical infrastructure available to support all aspects of the learner's lifecycle; from recruitment through to assessment.

Mobile technologies have been widely appropriated for social and informal activities, some of which are educational. Designing for mobile learning provides a glimpse of what designing for the future could be - where education is no longer 'designed and delivered' to a group of learners in an expected, defined context, but where each individual engages in their own learning, through their own devices, from their own setting and on their own terms. This chapter lays out how design principles need to evolve to support educators to design content, activities, communications and spaces for such a context.

The chapter highlights some environmental and societal changes that have occurred since the authors contributed chapters on this topic to previous editions of this book. The role of design in relation to learning technology developments is considered, with a focus on design for learning that is personalized, situated, authentic and informal. Design of content, activities, communities, and communication is discussed. The ten design principles proposed by the authors take account of the characteristics of mobile technologies and consider the social context into which they are appropriated. The design principles recognize the centrality of learners with their personal technologies and their preferences, experiences and expectations, alongside the unique nature and added value of mobile learning, and the idea that mobile learning is synonymous with unpredictability and constant change. The principles are likely to have wider applicability beyond mobile learning as personalized, situated, authentic and informal learning becomes the norm.

Our interest in studying digital literacies arises from what we perceive as a failure to develop students' capacities to learn deeply in a technology-rich environment. The trends towards networked communities and digital citizenship, as well as workplace changes including distributed/collaborative work patterns and an (arguably) higher value being placed on 'knowledge' work, all make digital capabilities central to what higher education can offer. While we see efforts being made to support learners’ ICT skills – or at least bring these up to a minimum standard of competence – these are rarely integrated with the development of other capabilities critical to higher learning. E-learning is often celebrated for its potential to extend participation. As we are increasingly saturated in opportunities for acquiring knowledge (Downes 2005, Walton et al. 2007, Anderson 2008), informal networked learning has achieved a new prominence in educational discourse, to the extent that it has almost become the measure by which formal learning is judged. In practice, however, we see digital opportunities being disproportionately taken up, and benefited from, by those with existing educational capital (see for example NIACE 2008). Too often, also, e-learning is used as a shorthand for the management of learning by digital means, rather than the exploration of disciplinary knowledge and knowledge practices in a new digital context. A more competence-based curriculum is becoming the norm, a development which has arguably been accelerated by the standardisation of qualifications in a global (digital) learning market. And yet, we see evidence that effective learners in digital – as in other – contexts have not been motivated by competence-based approaches to learning. We are excited by the current theoretical interest in digital literacies, and yet our motivation remains a pragmatic one: to investigate how learners are developing literacies for learning and meeting their learning goals, a

This chapter focuses on inhabiting learning spaces.

This chapter discusses the Student as Producer project at the University of Lincoln and provides two case studies of how Student as Producer is infiltrating quite different areas of university life. The first discusses Student as Producer in the context of Deleuze and rhizomatic curriculum design, while the second looks at how the project is being applied to the development of an open institutional infrastructure, in which Computer Science students are redesigning and developing the tools used for research, teaching and learning.

Drawing on the example of the ‘Student as Producer’ project at the University of Lincoln, UK, this chapter explains how curriculum design is expected to be informed by a view of the student as an active contributor and collaborator to the knowledge creation process. The Centre for Educational Research and Development was created in 2007 to lead the University of Lincoln’s Teaching and Learning Strategy, run post-graduate courses for the study of education and practice of teaching, and support the academic use of technology across the university. The chapter discusses Student as Producer in the context of Deleuze and rhizomatic curriculum design. It looks at how the project is being applied to the development of an open institutional infrastructure, in which Computer Science students are redesigning and developing the tools used for research, teaching and learning.

The chapter highlights some environmental and societal changes that have occurred since the authors contributed chapters on this topic to previous editions of this book. The role of design in relation to learning technology developments is considered, with a focus on design for learning that is personalized, situated, authentic and informal. Design of content, activities, communities, and communication is discussed. The ten design principles proposed by the authors take account of the characteristics of mobile technologies and consider the social context into which they are appropriated. The design principles recognize the centrality of learners with their personal technologies and their preferences, experiences and expectations, alongside the unique nature and added value of mobile learning, and the idea that mobile learning is synonymous with unpredictability and constant change. The principles are likely to have wider applicability beyond mobile learning as personalized, situated, authentic and informal learning becomes the norm.

Our interest in studying digital literacies arises from what we perceive as a failure to develop students' capacities to learn deeply in a technology-rich environment. The trends towards networked communities and digital citizenship, as well as workplace changes including distributed/collaborative work patterns and an (arguably) higher value being placed on 'knowledge' work, all make digital capabilities central to what higher education can offer. While we see efforts being made to support learners’ ICT skills – or at least bring these up to a minimum standard of competence – these are rarely integrated with the development of other capabilities critical to higher learning. E-learning is often celebrated for its potential to extend participation. As we are increasingly saturated in opportunities for acquiring knowledge (Downes 2005, Walton et al. 2007, Anderson 2008), informal networked learning has achieved a new prominence in educational discourse, to the extent that it has almost become the measure by which formal learning is judged. In practice, however, we see digital opportunities being disproportionately taken up, and benefited from, by those with existing educational capital (see for example NIACE 2008). Too often, also, e-learning is used as a shorthand for the management of learning by digital means, rather than the exploration of disciplinary knowledge and knowledge practices in a new digital context. A more competence-based curriculum is becoming the norm, a development which has arguably been accelerated by the standardisation of qualifications in a global (digital) learning market. And yet, we see evidence that effective learners in digital – as in other – contexts have not been motivated by competence-based approaches to learning. We are excited by the current theoretical interest in digital literacies, and yet our motivation remains a pragmatic one: to investigate how learners are developing literacies for learning and meeting their learning goals, a

Mobile technologies have been widely appropriated for social and informal activities, some of which are educational. Designing for mobile learning provides a glimpse of what designing for the future could be - where education is no longer 'designed and delivered' to a group of learners in an expected, defined context, but where each individual engages in their own learning, through their own devices, from their own setting and on their own terms. This chapter lays out how design principles need to evolve to support educators to design content, activities, communications and spaces for such a context.

Introduction: the future for learners' experiences The opening paragraphs of any recent policy documents are a testimony to the recognised importance of e-learning in education. As the case studies in this book also attest, e-learning models and theories, simulations, computer modelling and social software are now an integral part of most learners' experience and environment. Similarly, institutions now recognise the strategic importance of ICT and have central policies in place to ensure that there is a technical infrastructure available to support all aspects of the learner's lifecycle; from recruitment through to assessment.

Understanding the reality of how course design occurs is crucial to applying the principles that underpin designing for learning in technology-enabled contexts. Although a myriad of educational rationales and design tools are available, the process of designing for learning within a course setting is a complex process. While the primary aim of designing for learning is to create pedagogically effective courses, now teachers and learning designers are frequently being asked to do something much more ambitious – to design courses that contribute to a radical transformation of the curriculum across an institution. Can design for learning meet this ambitious aim? This chapter reviews how attempts to transform the curriculum have progressed and what we have discovered about how to support practitioners through such design processes. It makes recommendations for how the field of learning design could respond to institutional imperatives for radically redesigned, technology-rich curricula.

Our interest in studying digital literacies arises from what we perceive as a failure to develop students' capacities to learn deeply in a technology-rich environment. The trends towards networked communities and digital citizenship, as well as workplace changes including distributed/collaborative work patterns and an (arguably) higher value being placed on 'knowledge' work, all make digital capabilities central to what higher education can offer. While we see efforts being made to support learners’ ICT skills – or at least bring these up to a minimum standard of competence – these are rarely integrated with the development of other capabilities critical to higher learning. E-learning is often celebrated for its potential to extend participation. As we are increasingly saturated in opportunities for acquiring knowledge (Downes 2005, Walton et al. 2007, Anderson 2008), informal networked learning has achieved a new prominence in educational discourse, to the extent that it has almost become the measure by which formal learning is judged. In practice, however, we see digital opportunities being disproportionately taken up, and benefited from, by those with existing educational capital (see for example NIACE 2008). Too often, also, e-learning is used as a shorthand for the management of learning by digital means, rather than the exploration of disciplinary knowledge and knowledge practices in a new digital context. A more competence-based curriculum is becoming the norm, a development which has arguably been accelerated by the standardisation of qualifications in a global (digital) learning market. And yet, we see evidence that effective learners in digital – as in other – contexts have not been motivated by competence-based approaches to learning. We are excited by the current theoretical interest in digital literacies, and yet our motivation remains a pragmatic one: to investigate how learners are developing literacies for learning and meeting their learning goals, a