The Implementations and the Literature

The consolidated findings o f the First phase study suggested that a social constructivist approach to module design and delivery may be appropriate. The implication o f adopting a constructivist approach to pedagogic design for online learning involves customization o f curricula and teaching strategies in cognizance o f the learner’s prior knowledge and background (Saade et al., 2005). The consolidated findings suggested that strategies should include the posing o f open-ended questions that promote discourse, diversity o f opinion, and dialogue among learners, provoking an air o f uncertainty and a quest for the resolution o f meanings in the mind space o f the learner. However, placing responsibility on learners for the construction o f knowledge also necessitates that their cognitive ability be not be taxed beyond reasonable capabilities. Also, learners should be grouped with others who are unable or unwilling to make a reasonable contribution in collaborative efforts. In addition, learning abilities and cognitive capacity must match the learning objectives o f the stated curriculum so as not to under challenge or over challenge the learner.

According to Lynn, Thompson and McDonald (2005), while there are variations o f

viewpoints among constructivists, they all agree that learning is active, situated, and social. Chizmar and Williams (1998) presented seven principles for good teaching practice in the choice o f pedagogy:

1) Encourage contacts between students and faculty. 2) Develop reciprocity and cooperation among students. 3) Use active learning techniques.

4) Give prompt feedback. 5) Emphasise time on task.

7) Respect diverse talents and ways o f learning.

(Quoted directly from Chizmar and Williams (1998, P. 165) What is noteworthy o f these seven principles is that they are learner centric. Each one has the potential to enhance learner experience. In addition they implicitly espouse the constructivist approach to e-learning and suggest the use o f specific tools (e.g. discussion forum to facilitate communications between students and faculty and calendar to

emphasise time on task). Nichols (2003), in recommending that tools be made available to facilitate meaningful learning, referred to an active learning process, diverse expressions o f knowledge, collaborative problem solving, and real world activities. A toolset based on a constructivist pedagogical design, may include emails and discussion groups to facilitate the establishment o f group objectives, Web pages and search engines to facilitate the collection o f information, data analysis software to organize and add meaning to

information, and simulation and animation tools to promote understanding o f real world concepts (Mishra, 2002). All this, in theory at least, points to a potentially rich, multi-tool, mediated learning experience for students. The overall e-leaming experience is gained as learners use technology to undertake learning tasks. It is not surprising then that the literature provides substantial discussion on technology and pedagogy (Section 2.6). In an IT mediated learning environment online learning tools are used to enable and support learners as they undertake learning tasks such as engaging, reflecting, questioning, answering, pacing, elaborating, discussing, inquiring, problem solving, linking, constructing, analysing, evaluating and synthesising (Hou Vat, 2001). This raises two questions central to the quality o f students’ experience. Firstly, the suitability o f individual tools for supporting learning tasks and secondly the pedagogical quality o f learning design.

The theme ‘support learning tasks and allow learners to experience pedagogical quality’ is well supported in the literature. For example, Gilbert et al. (2007) suggested several

theoretical frameworks and empirical studies which identify technology and pedagogy as key determinants o f quality e-leaming experiences. They highlighted the importance o f technology, pedagogy and organisational context, and advocate attention to pedagogy, technology and creativity. Adams (2004) argued that pedagogy is o f primary importance as it determines the way students engage with learning matter. Thus pedagogy can be seen as having a major influence on the quality o f the students’ experiences. Nichols (2003) also elevated pedagogy in suggesting that it should inform tool selection. Indeed, the case for pedagogy driven design is supported by a broad range o f the literature e.g. (Dalsgaard, 2005; Neal et al., 2003; Chee, 2002; Chizmar and Williams, 1998). Conole et al. (2004) made explicit the importance o f technology and pedagogy, and gave precedence to pedagogy by developing a tool which helps to map pedagogic design to tool. The first phase study produced scant evidence that any student had strong explicit feelings or views with regard to technology or pedagogy. I did however conclude from the first phase study and second phase study that active leadership, while being evident and responsive, should be so regardless o f the adopted pedagogy. Both the first phase study and second phase study results suggested this is an overriding principle in any e-leaming environment. For example it was an issue for Fay who highlighted the importance o f the visibility o f “the man behind the machine” in reflecting on her e-leaming experience across diverse pedagogies. The second phase study, both from a learners’ and tutors’ perspective

highlighted the importance o f social constmctivism as a theory to guide pedagogic design. This is consistent with my preferred pedagogic approach, which I believe is most

appropriate to Masters’ students studying research methodology and statistics. The first, high level recommendations, aimed at improving learners e-leaming experiences emerge as follows:

1) Apply a social constmctivist approach

3) Specify the task to promote use o f e-leaming tools which best support constmctivist learning

4) Use evaluation techniques which are consistent with constmctivist philosophy

These recommendations recognise that the pedagogy underlying module design, including learning task design, instructions on achieving learning outcomes, and assessment, will impact on the experience o f learners. For example, a task which promotes social constmctivism may be group based and specified to require information gathering on diverse views, ideas and theories, in addition to concept linking and the integration o f knowledge. The Web, because it facilitates parallel streams o f nonlinear inquiry through the use o f hyperlinks, may be an appropriate tool. Microsoft word, suited to recording, organising, depicting, reflecting on and questioning gathered information, may be used to develop a report for assessment. However, because this tool supports the copy and paste function, Morgan et al. (2006) argued that it may “subvert the constmctivist philosophy”. This suggests applying one o f two strategies. Firstly, the report specification could require varied representations o f concepts by the use o f graphics. Such concept mapping or concept comparison mapping graphics encourage knowledge integration. Secondly it may be more appropriate to replace or augment the report with a group presentation open to questions afterwards, thereby encouraging the group to broaden, share and negotiate a common understanding o f information and concepts. This will also encourage interactivity which Thorpe and Goodwin (2006) argued plays a very important role in e-leaming.

This section has traced the development o f the set o f action which were implemented in a blended learning environment. The plan for implementing the actions is presented in the next section.