Warren Scott Ulrich Rauch University of British Columbia

An Organic Learning Object Cycle:

A Communication-centric Model for Knowledge-building Using

Collaborative Tools

Warren ScottUlrich Rauch University of British Columbia

The University of British Columbia (live)

http://142.103.183.237/view/view.shtml

Outline • Look forward to emerging models of object-oriented

collaborative interaction and…

…subsequent re-use of the interactions themselves as learning objects.

• Discussion of a framework model that allows us to understand the development of an organic cycle of learning object oriented knowledge building

• Examples: diverse means of integrating learning objects into course development

• Examples: we discuss the advance of Tablet PCs, peer-to-peer software (eg. Silicon Chalk), and sophisticated, feature-rich bulletin boards as we begin to approach peer- led, student-centred and learner controlled communities of information exchange.

• Discussion of the cycling of the model with time and technology

Chunks of Content?

• Learning objects have been viewed in a static, content-centric way; as re-usable "chunks" of content that mediate learning and can be re-combined in new contexts.

• The recognition of interactivity and communication as a basis for effective e-learning has brought forward a number of technologies and strategies that promise to engage students fully; such tools can take effective advantage of learning object paradigms.

adapted from Wiley @ UBC, 03/2003

Interaction

e-learning emerges as benefiting not so much from re-usable aggregated content, but from collaborative knowledge building

Content

How can we map Learning Objects oriented design and programming to collaborative knowledge building environments?

Content Mastery ≠ Learning

Gratuitous Definition of a Learning Object

• A learning object is a reusable unit of instruction for e-learning. In order to use it in different contexts, the presentation has to be separated from the content. which calls for specific data formats. SCORM is such a format.

Source: http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning Objects

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-learning

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCORM

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_Objects



Why organic Learning Objects?

• We propose an “organic” approach to educational web-based systems where learning objects, operations on these objects, and actors that perform with them are aggregated in meaningful ways.

• Users of learning objects must be able to propose adaptations and improvements constantly, and flexibly.

(adapted from Paquette & Rosca, Canadian Journal of Learning and TechnologyVolume 28(3) Fall / automne, 2002: Organic Aggregation of Knowledge Object in Educational Systems)

Aggregation types: A comparison of the

Lego, Chemistry and organic metaphors

Source: Canadian Journal of Learning and TechnologyVolume 28(3) Fall / automne, 2002: Organic Aggregation of Knowledge Object in Educational Systems. Gilbert Paquette, Ioan Rosca

-our use of “organic” is less systemic, and relates to a social and dynamic “grassroots” growth of knowledge.

adapted from Wiley @ UBC, 03/2003

Content

Interaction

Knowledge

Comprehension

Application

Analysis

Synthesis

Evaluation

Blo

om

Learn

ing

Levels

(Blo

om

et

al , 1

95

6)

Wiley @ UBC, 03/2003

Content

Interaction

Bloom levels and collaboration

Knowledge

Comprehension

Application

Analysis

Synthesis

Evaluation

Blo

om

Learn

ing

Levels

(Blo

om

et

al , 1

95

6)


Content

Interaction

• mostly decontextualised

Rich Content:-Learning Objects in LO Databases

-Files in Folders, etc.

Start with rich content

Rich Content: “primordial stew”

Knowledge

Comprehension

Application

Analysis

Synthesis

Evaluation

Blo

om

Learn

ing

Levels

(Blo

om

et

al , 1

95

6)




Content

Interaction

Next, Content in Context : “knowledge” level

Content in Context:-Aggregated Content, in course Contexts

-eg. WebCT ContentPages

Content in Context : “knowledge” level

Knowledge

Comprehension

Application

Analysis

Synthesis

Evaluation

Blo

om

Learn

ing

Levels

(Blo

om

et

al , 1

95

6)


Content

Interaction





Student Interaction With [Course] Content

E.g. Simulation, Tablets

Interaction with Content

-Student/Class Interaction With [Course] Content

“The 3 Way Media Tool”

Interaction with Content

“Tablet PCs in the Wild”

http://isit.arts.ubc.ca/eng111/introvid.cfm?module=woolf

Knowledge

Comprehension

Application

Analysis

Synthesis

Evaluation

Blo

om

Learn

ing

Levels

(Blo

om

et

al , 1

95

6)


Content

Interaction






E.g. Simulation, Tablets

Interaction: student-student, student-teacher

-Discussion in context

Initial Collaborative Activities

• Interaction– Student-student, student-teacher– Discussion in context

• Participants contribute new knowledge objects to explain ideas in discussion– eg. “I found this image -- here it is -- and I think…”

Collaborative Activities

Collaborative Activities II

Collaborative Activities: self-organised metatagging of knowlege

objects

Knowledge

Comprehension

Application

Analysis

Synthesis

Evaluation

Blo

om

Learn

ing

Levels

(Blo

om

et

al , 1

95

6)


Content

Interaction






Eg. Simulation, Silicon Chalk, Tablets

Collaborative Knowledge Building Participants pull in (link) to new knowledge objects to explain ideas in discussion context

Interaction: student w/ student, student w/ teacher


Collaborative Knowledge Building

Knowledge

Comprehension

Application

Analysis

Synthesis

Evaluation

Blo

om

Learn

ing

Levels

(Blo

om

et

al , 1

95

6)


Content

Interaction






E.g. Simulation,Tablets

Collaborative Knowledge Building…and learning objects

The discussion/interaction record ITSELF becomes a learning object (generation of new knowledge/content/ideas)

-eg. A Threaded Discussion, a Weblog



Participants pull in (link) to new knowledge objects to explain ideas in discussion context

Integrate new knowledge into existing knowledge base

Knowledge

Comprehension

Application

Analysis

Synthesis

Evaluation

Blo

om

Learn

ing

Levels

(Blo

om

et

al , 1

95

6)


Content

Interaction






E.g. Simulation,Tablets






Re-incorporate new knowledge into existing knowledge base

-eg. Wikis, wikipedia, movable type/RSS

Integrate new knowledge into existing knowledge base

• Self-organising collaborative projects• Transition of a community of learners into a self-

organising system

– Blogs– RSS – Wikis

• Ability to “liquify” content and interaction objects is important determinant of flexibility of re-integration/aggregation

Integrate new knowledge into existing knowledge base: examples

Wiki-based Peer Editing

Wikipedia: an example of Organic Collaborative Knowledge Building

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace%2C_extend%2C_and_extinguish

http://www.wikipedia.org



…and repeat.

Re-incorporate new knowledge into existing


Knowledge

Comprehension

Application

Analysis

Synthesis

Evaluation

Blo

om

Learn

ing

Levels

(Blo

om

et

al , 1

95

6)


Content

Interaction






Eg. Simulation, Silicon Chalk, Tablets






Content

Interaction

Inte

racti

on

ContentChange in TIME & TECHNOLOGY

Cycles of KnowledgeBuilding over Time

??Content

Interaction

Content

Interaction

Content

Interaction

Content

Interaction

Content

Interaction

Content

Interaction

??In

tera

cti

on

ContentChange in TIME & TECHNOLOGY

????

Cycles of KnowledgeBuilding over Time

What will we see in the next cycle … … and the next?

Trend I: Increasing ability to disaggregate interaction/content from context

Trend II: Increasing ability to navigate diverse histories of ideas

“threadspace”Allows us to capture the breadth of input that leads to the formation of an idea or

concept

Trend III: P2P as means to collaborative knowledge building

Have you blogged at a wysiwyg wiki lately? Is your RSS keeping you well fed?

Trend I: Increasing ability to disaggregate interaction/content from

context

• Problem: extraction of content from context while preserving the inherent meaning of the object

• Solution: liquifying/exporting/importing e.g discussions, annotations, harvesting from the semantic web

• Effect: reprocessing/re-construction of “raw data” – Distilling emerging themes, topics– Develop categories/graphical representation of topics– Establish relationship between topics

“Liquify”

“Re-aggregate”

Interaction



Re-incorporate new knowledge into existing




…walking the talk

http://edziza.arts.ubc.ca/devstage/sandbox/parsewct2xml.cfm?getcontent=yes

http://isit.arts.ubc.ca/eng111/template_dynamic.cfm?module=review&pagenumber=1

Trend II: Increasing ability to navigate diverse histories of ideas

• Problem: visualising a non-linear display of complex trajectories of ideas

• Solution: overlaying of dimensions, i.e. overlaying a network of people and network of ideas in two or more dimensions

• Effect: A dimensional space that permits the collocation of people with ideas

Trend II: continued

• Reflection: we have moved from thinking about re-usable content to thinking about making re-used content available through elaborate social and technical networks. Re-usability is now a function of [high] availability of standards-based resources and not one of “cut and paste” replication.

• Tools (really: interfaces to the semantic web) allow us to collect and aggregate interactions

Trend III:P2P (technically and socially) as means to collaborative knowledge

building• Problem: the fit get rich/winner takes it all

– What is the topology of these networks? Are there emerging “laws of Physics?” Are these networks/spaces democratic? Random or scale free?

• Solution (technical): From client-server relationship to client-client, with each client alternately using their capacities as “server” or as “client”

• Solution,(social): An iteration of the organic learning-object cycle, where “peers” add content and context to a given object, resulting in a richer object…which in turn can be disaggregated in NEW ways, in a subsequent cycle.

• Effect: A multi-dimensional network of users with hubs turning nodes- turning hubs

• Question: what are the organizing principles that govern the development of these live and organic collaborative networks of ideas/users?

Thank You!

Ulrich Rauch [email protected] Scott [email protected]

Warren Scott Ulrich Rauch University of British Columbia

Documents

Transcript of Warren Scott Ulrich Rauch University of British Columbia