Representing learning designs#
See also: design
Example tools#
Zalavara et al (2022) used
Conole and Jones (2010)#
Aims to critique different types of representation of practice as applied to various levels" of decision-making - pedagogical patterns and visual learning design. Doing this in the context of an LMS migration.
We argue that pedagogical patterns and learning design have emerged as parallel approaches to describing practice in recent years. Despite their very different origins, both provide complementary representations, which emphasize different aspects of the practice being described.
Zalavara et al 2022#
DBR project seeking to understand practitioners experiences with LD representations (and tools to help with those representations). Research question
How to represent learning designs in a design support tool?
Integrative review#
57 papers reviewed
- 5 papers focused on LD tools’ representational dimensions providing a systematic analysis;
- 12 papers overviewed some LD tools without systematically analysing their representational dimensions, mainly at a background level;
- 15 papers just mentioned LD representation as a critical issue in LD research, mainly at an introductory level;
- 21 papers conceptualised and/or presented and/or evaluated a specific tool without systematically analysing its representational dimensions;
- 4 papers focused on the dimension of representational format investigating a particular type.
LD representational framework#
Authors further research did not cover purpose - not interested in enactment.
| Dimension | Referencs | Description |
|---|---|---|
| purpose | (Agostinho, 2011; Masterman & Craft, 2013; Pozzi et al., 2016) | features facilitating learning intervention design or deployment or both. |
| format | (Agostinho, 2011; Conole, 2013; Conole & Wills, 2013; Masterman & Craft, 2013; Pozzi et al., 2016) | features that either support text-based or visual representation or a combination of them. |
| level | (Conole, 2013) | features supporting interventions spanning from small-scale to the whole curriculum. |
| lens | (Conole, 2013; Conole & Wills, 2013) | features that focus on specific learning design elements, e.g. elements elaborating a design’s pedagogy. |
| guidance and support dimension | (Agostinho, 2011; Conole, 2013; Conole & Wills, 2013; Masterman & Craft, 2013) | degree of support provided to designers in terms of structuring, articulating and modelling specific learning design elements, such as the content, the technologies and/or the pedagogy. |
| organisation | (Agostinho, 2011; Conole & Wills, 2013) | features composing the organisation of learning activities’ sequences and providing either a global overview or some sequential form of the design or a combination. |
| formalism | (Agostinho, 2011; Conole & Wills, 2013; Pozzi et al., 2016) | features supporting rigorous, precise and perhaps machine-runnable representations, thus supporting a high level of formalism. Alternatively, features may grant the designers freedom of expression, thus being less formalised. |
| contextualisation | (Masterman & Craft, 2013; Pozzi et al., 2016) | the level that LD features support articulating a design’s context, spanning from composing an abstract design to a highly structured one that enables specifying details of a design’s elements. |
Research#
Focused on four of the dimensions
| Dimension | Findings |
|---|---|
| Format | Strong preference for visual format and global organisation, some support for existing literature |
| Organisation | Contradict existing literature by prefer global organisation |
| Guidance and support | mixed and somewhat task specific |
| Contextualisation | Value in providing more |
References#
Conole, G., & Jones, C. (2010). Sharing practice, problems and solutions for institutional change (P. Goodyear & S. Relatis, Eds.; No. 2; Issue 2, pp. 277--296). Sense Publishers.
Zalavra, E., Papanikolaou, K., Dimitriadis, Y., & Sgouropoulou, C. (2022). Representing learning designs in a design support tool. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11441-6