DEVELOPING THE CARIBBEAN EDUCATORS NETWORK (CEN) E-MEDIATING FRAMEWORK LeRoy Hill, PhD Director, Humanities & Education Anguilla Community College AECT CONVENTION 2012 Louisville, Kentucky
Dec 08, 2014
DEVELOPING THE CARIBBEAN EDUCATORS NETWORK (CEN) E-MEDIATING FRAMEWORK
LeRoy Hill, PhDDirector, Humanities & EducationAnguilla Community College
AECT CONVENTION 2012 Louisville, Kentucky
CONTEXT
CPD: The design challenge
The CEN: the research environment
NING: The technological environment
“…every story has a deeper meaning that drives the narrative.”
CPD CHALLENGE – THE PROBLEM
• Little attention is given to teacher education/continuing development in the Caribbean (Carrington, 1993)
• Miles (1995) also states that the efforts that are made are: under-resourced, unsustained, designed for a “one size fits all”, imposed rather than owned
• Robinson and Latchem (2003) suggests the use of open, distance and information and communication technologies (ICT)s
WHAT IS CEN?
Social Network comprising of
Synchronous and asynchronous technologies (i.e. forums, discussion groups, webinars, etc...)Used to encourage critical and reflective dialogue between its members
The network is built on the NING social networking platform that has a number of asynchronous and synchronous social network technologies (i.e. forums, discussion groups, webinars, etc…) to encourage critical and reflective dialogue between its members.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Research Plane
Outcome
Design Plane
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
What is the nature of the CPD interests of members of the CEN?
What is the nature of the CAG?
What processes and presences mediate the collaborative knowledge-building in the Diversity of Learning group?
What is the nature of CEN?a. What is its membership, activities, and
interests?
How do I go about designing an online CPD framework for the CEN?
How might Activity-Oriented Design Methods be used to support an interpretation of the CEN activity system?
What is the nature of the participatory design approach in the CAG?
How is a participatory design approach applied in making sense collaboratively of a framework to mediate collaborative knowledge-building in the CEN?
Initial analysis that provided basis for multiple plane activity system analysis;
Application of AODM provided deeper insight of the CEN, membership interest, activities and shared object in network and a need to focus on mediating framework in groups.
Exploration of nature of the participatory design group (CAG) proved useful in highlighting design suggestions and volunteers for group coding in next cycle.
Group coding activity and literature review provided basis for inter-subjective interpretation and theorisation of the CEN e-mediating presence
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle
Planning(Methodology)
Acting, Observing, Reflecting Outcome
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
- New Research questions
- Themes for literature
- AODM application
- CEN Advisory Group (CAG) for participatory design
- Coded collaborative knowledge-building processes & presences.
- Developed framework for mediating collaborative knowledge-building.
Phase1
Phase2
Framework: AODM:ESMMethods: Qualitative Descriptive analysis; Analysis of asynchronous & synchronous dialogueObservation: field journal, responses from network members
Framework: AODM Methods: Mixed:Descriptive analysis of Membership database, observation: composition of CEN groups, Web traffic data: Google analytics
Content analysis of asynchronous communication: field notes, discussion forum transcripts, RSS activity feed transcripts; field notes; synchronous communication: Elluminate Live session transcripts, Instant Messaging Chat log
Framework: COI, group cognition, activity theoryMethods: Qualitative:Analysis of asynchronous; member page profiles, review of literature
Methods: Mixed: Descriptive Statistics fromOnline questionnaire, membership database
Methodology
CYCLE 1: AN INITIAL LOOK AT THE CEN
Tools
Roles
ObjectSubject
Rules & RegulationsCommunity
- Ning-CPD online questionnaire -Literature on learning design
-Constructivist design approach-Ning environment constraints-
-Designer (me)
-Designer-Administrator-Researcher
- CEN – Caribbean Educators
Learning Design Activity System – BCycle 1
ActualOutcome
-List of CPD interests of 13 members (Approach not sustainable)
-Questions become part of network process
-New research questions
- Designing CPD activities
Research Question
What is the nature the CPD interests
of members of the CEN?
How do I go about designing an
online CPD framework for the CEN?
CYCLE 2: DEVELOPING A DEEPER UNDERSTANDING OF THE CEN – THE UTILITY OF THE AODM APPROACH
Research Question
What is the nature of
CEN?
-What are its
membership, activities,
and interests?
How might Activity-
Oriented Design
Methods be used to
support an
interpretation of the
CEN activity system?
Tools
Roles
ObjectSubject
Rules & RegulationsCommunity
- Ning-Embedded questionnaire items.-Elluminate Live, Media sharing- Group Forums, Dialogic exchanges, participation
-Ning environment constraints- socio-cultural setting- technological skills -Explicit rules-Sign up process (closed membership)-Ethical declaration
-CEN member predominantlyEnglish speaking and female.)
Collaborative Knowledge building & sharing
-Member-Administrator-Greeters
Caribbean Educators
CEN Activity System – BCycle 2
Outcome-Sustainable CKB framework
CEN Activity System - A
OutcomeOutcomeKnowledge building &
sharing
Learning Design Activity System - B
Questionnaire items
AODM: 6 STAGES, 4 TOOLS
Stage 1. Interpreting the situation being examined in terms of Activity theory.
- Eight-Step-Model (ESM) forms part of this stage.
Stage 2. Model the situation being examined-information collected from the ESM is used in this stage to create a representation of the activity system.
Stage 3. Decompose the activity system -Decomposition of the results ESM is achieved through the Activity Notation tool which further simplifies process into smaller units for analysis.
Stage 4. Generate research questions
Stage 5. Conduct a detailed investigation
Stage 6. Interpret and communicate findings - A technique for Mapping Operational processes is used as part of this.
THE AODM…The Eight-Step-Model
Identify the: - Question to AskStep 1 Activity of interest What sort of activity am I interested in?Step 2 Object-ive Why is the activity taking place?Step 3 Subjects Who is involved in carrying out this activity?Step 4 Tools By what means are the subjects performing this
activity?Step 5 Rules & Regulations Are there any cultural norms, rules or regulations
governing the performance of this activity?Step 6 Division of labour Who is responsible for what, when carrying out this
activity and how are the roles organised?Step 7 Community What is the environment in which this activity is
carried out?Step 8 Outcome What is the desired Outcome from carrying out this
activity?
AODM’s Eight-Step-Model (Mwanza 2002, p.128)
The Activity NotationActors (Doers)
~ Mediator ~ Object-ive (Purpose)
Subjects ~ Tools ~ Object
Subjects ~
Rules ~ Object
Subjects ~
Division of Labour
~ Object
Community ~
Tools ~ Object
Community ~ Rules ~ ObjectCommunity ~ Division of
Labour
~ Object
AODM’s Activity Notation (Mwanza 2002, p.152)
The Technique of Generating General Research Questions1) What Tools do the Subjects use to achieve their
Objective and how?
2) What Rules affect the way the Subjects achieve the Objective and how?
3) How does the Division of Labour influence the way the Subjects satisfy their Objective?
4) How do the Tools in use affect the way the Community achieves the Objective?
5) What Rules affect the way the Community satisfies their Objective and how?
6) How does the Division of Labour affect the way the Community achieves the Objective?
AODM’s Technique of Generating General Research Questions (Mwanza 2002, p.155)
AODM’s Technique of Mapping AODM Operational Processes (Mwanza 2002, p.162)
WHY AODM?
• As a planning tool, AODM tends to be largely iterative and aims to help designers “generate insights for further study and refinement” (Greenhow & Belbas 2007, p.369)
• The AODM provides a comprehensive and empirically tested set of tools in operationalising Activity Theory in design analysis and development process by making explicit the “process of gathering, analysis and communicating design requirements” (Mwanza 2002, p.214).
• Clearly outlined in 6 stages and methodological tools: (1) A Eight-Step-Model (2) An activity Notation (3) A technique for generating Sub-Activity-Oriented Research questions (4) A technique for Mapping Operational processes.
• Application of AODM in CEN Context provides a different setting to test…
CYCLE 3: THE CEN ADVISORY GROUP: EXPLORING THE NATURE OF THE CAG - THE PARTICIPATORY DESIGN WORKING GROUP
Research
Questions
What is the nature of
the CAG?
What is the nature of
the participatory
design approach in
the CAG?
Tools
Roles
ObjectSubject
Rules & RegulationsCommunity
- Dialogic exchanges,- Elluminate Live- Literature
-Wider network regulations-Group established protocols
-CAG member
-Advisor-Designer-Researcher-Group initiator
- CAG
CAG Activity System – A Cycle 3
Desired Outcome
Learning Design Activity System - C (Cycle 3)
Object
Tools
Participatory design:Co-construction of knowledge through dialogue
Design framework for collaborative knowledge building & sharing
INITIAL CATEGORIES
Themes Description Theoretical
Mapping
Tools The appropriation of tools in collaborative
knowledge-building; in establishing,
managing interactions and connections as a
process of ‘Artefactization’.
Activity Theory
Moderating Moderating the collaborative knowledge-
building activity; establishing roles and rules
for moderating activity
Activity Theory
Reflective self and group evaluative dialogue;
metacognitive statements .
Group Cognition, CoI
Community a sense of identity and purpose, group
formation
Group Cognition, CoI
Social facilitating social interaction through open
and welcoming dialogue.
Group Cognition, CoI
Cognitive Co-construction of knowledge, negotiating
group knowledge, perspective sharing,
knowledge negotiation.
Group Cognition, CoI
INITIAL DESIGN REPRESENTATION OF FRAMEWORK
Refedfd
Instrumentization Presence‘Artefactizations’
Moderating Presence
OUTCOME
OUTCOME
OBJECT
OBJECT
PROCESS
PROCESS
CYCLE 4: EXPLORING THE CEN COLLABORATIVE KNOWLEDGE-BUILDING E-MEDIATING FRAMEWORK
Tools
Roles
ObjectSubject
Rules & RegulationsCommunity
-Word processor commenting feature-Transcribed content of asynchronous communication, -Coded unit of analysis-Literature review-COI framework, group cognition, activity theory
- Coding specifications- Creswel (2009)
- Coders(Mille, LeRoy, Jean, Deem)
-Designer-Researcher-Coder
- CAG, CEN
Learning Design Activity System – D Cycle 4
Desired Outcome
-Participatory design:Co-construction of knowledge
collaborative knowledge-building framework
Research Questions
What processes and presences
mediate the collaborative
knowledge-building in the
Diversity of Learning group?
How is a participatory design
approach applied in making
sense collaboratively of a
framework to mediate
collaborative knowledge-
building in the CEN?
Sample coding by Coder
LINKING CODES TO PROCESSES AND PRESENCES
Category Operational definition IndicatorsCognitive presence
Key Processes: Reflection, meta-
cognition, valuing, cognition
The extent to which a group co-construct
meaning through collaborative dialogue that
demonstrates knowledge and skills, self-
awareness, self-control, and self-regulation.
Cognition
Asking questions, making inferences, formulating hypothesis,
making decisions, defining terms, requesting knowledge-sharing,
sharing knowledge, sharing opinions.
Reflection
Evaluations, criticism, appreciation, making value statements,
making reference to knowledge, experience, expertise,
acknowledging understanding. Eg. I understand, I think, I wonder.
(adapted from Henri’s 1992 Analytical model p129)
Community presence
Key Processes: legitimate peripheral
participation, social interaction
This is the social function of the group and is
evaluated by the extent to which a group
fosters a sense of belongingness, and cohesion
through open dialogue.
Affective
Use of Humour, expressing emotions, expressing value, self-
disclosure, use of emoticons.
Open communication
continuing a thread, referring to a previous comment, asking
questions, complementing, expressing appreciation, expressing
agreement, expressing disagreement, personal advice, agreeing
to discuss further
Group cohesion & belongingness
Addressing or referring to member by name, using encouraging
language and tone, inclusive pronouns, showing interest in group
cohesion, interest in group activity, greetings, salutations, ‘small
talk’.
(Adapted from Garrison et al. 2000)
Moderating presence
Key processes: Designing and
supporting collaborative
knowledge-building setting;
Roles
The extent to which whole group
presences (Social, Cognitive and
‘Artefactization’)
and processes are designed and
facilitated through continuous
negotiation and designing of roles
and responsibilities.
Design
Sharing and assigning roles and ascribing duties,
defining and clarifying parameters of dialogue,
initiating themes for discussions.
Facilitating
Encouraging collaboration and participation, guiding
dialogue, facilitating meaning-making, seeking to
negotiate consensus, reinforcing or acknowledging
contributions.
‘Artefactization’ presence
Key processes: Selecting
appropriate context, tools.
The extent to which a group harnesses
technology, skills and knowledge to
actively satisfy shared object.
Technological setting,
Configuring tool for group use, introducing new tool or link,
embedding external object in group space.
Tool appropriation
Recommending tool, displaying tool use, sharing links,
sharing resources, encouraging use of tool, showing
evidence of tool use. For example, Let me share; I know
how to.
Messa
ge
Unit
Community
Moderati
ng
Artefactizati
on
Cognitive
1 X X X
2 X X
3 X
4 X
5 X X
6 X X
7 X X
8 X X
9 X X
10 X X X
11 X X X
12 X
13 X X
14 X X
15 X X
16 X X
17 X
18 X X X
19 X X X
20 X
21 X X
Recoding Result Summary
THE CEN E-MEDIATING FRAMEWORK
Community Presence
Cogn
itive
Pre
senc
e
‘Artefactizations’ Presence
Mod
erati
ng P
rese
nce
DESIRED OUTCOME(Condition)
OBJECT(Process)
OBJECT(Process)
DESIRED OUTCOME(Condition)
DES
IRED
OU
TCO
ME
(Con
ditio
n)
DES
IRED
OU
TCO
ME
(Con
ditio
n)
OBJ
ECT
(Pro
cess
)
OBJECT
(Process)
RESEARCH OUTCOMES
Cycle 1 Initial perspectiveMultiple plane
activity systems analysis
Cycle 2Deeper
understanding of network
Confirmed shared object in network
AODM provided research focus for exploring
collaborative knowledge-building framework
Cycle 3 Design suggestion from group
Established 6 themes for framework
Linked design suggestions to themes
Cycle 4 Inter-subjective group coding
Theoretical frames used as mediating
artefacts for conceptualising
framework
Verified link between codes and
themes
The CEN e-mediating presence
framework
THANK YOU!
Artwork done by students
REFERENCESCarrington, E. W. (1993). The future of education in the Caribbean: Report of the Caricom Advisory
Task Force on education. Evaluative Report, ERIC database.
Conole, G. & Oliver, M., 2006. Contemporary Perspectives in E-learning Research (Open & Flexible Learning) 1st ed., Routledge.
Greenhow, C. & Belbas, B., 2007. Using activity-oriented design methods to study collaborative knowledge-building in e-learning courses within higher education. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(4), 363-391.
Hill, L. (2011). A learning design approach for exploring a framework for mediating collaborative knowledge-building in the Caribbean Educators Network. Retrieved October 24, 2012, from http://etheses.nottingham.ac.uk/2356/
Miles, M. B. (1995). Forward. In T. Guskey & M. Huberman (Eds.), Professional development in education: New paradigms and practices (pp. vii–ix). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Mwanza, D. (2002) “Towards an Activity-Oriented Design Method for HCI Research and Practice.” PhD Thesis - The Open University, United Kingdom.
Mwanza-Simwami, D. (2009). Using Activity-Oriented Design Methods (AODM) to investigate mobile learning. In: Vavoula, Giasemi, Pachler, Norbert and Kukulska-Hulme, Agnes eds. Researching Mobile Learning Frameworks, tools and research designs. Oxford, UK: Peter Lang Verlag, 97–122.