Case Study Pädagogisches Institut Wien Experiences with Student Led Education

Transcription

1 Publicatie 9 Case Study Pädagogisches Institut Wien Experiences with Student Led Education Lectoraat elearning Onderzoekstraject etutoring Auteur: Margit Hofer September 2005

2 and a small part of the way the learner goes alone. INTERVIEW for INHOLLAND pilot on student led education The following interview has been held within the framework of the pilot studies launched by INHOLLAND on 2 June in Vienna, dealing with insights into the practical experience of student led education. In order to extract the practice of student led education, an interview with an expert in teacher training was held, analysing the success factors as well as the barriers for student led education. For many years Mag. Christa Schubert has taught English and Religion at primary school level [similar to the subject civics ]In both subjects she has been working with the pedagogical approach of open learning [student led education]. For approximately five years she has been training teachers at the PI [Pädagogisches Institut1] the training institute for teachers using an open learning approach. Since last schoolyear the PI has established online training via a platform called e-ak@demy [ The e-ak@demy offers several courses via an online communication platform [Moodel] for various topics and levels. The usage of the platform differs a lot and depends mainly on the course structure set by the tutors. While some courses use the platform mainly as a library for storing materials, others make extensive use of the interactive possibilities. Also the formats differ and range between blended learning training [some online periods mixed with face-2-face meetings] and education exclusively offered as online event. However, all trainings of the e-ak@demy are directed to the main principle of self-directed learning, as also visualized by the graphics of the main front page: learning when, where, how fast and how much you would like to learn. It is important for the interviewee to mention that this interview represents her own individual opinion on the open learning approach based on several pilots and therefore claims no objectivity. 1 Explanation: the PI is the central further training institution for teachers in Austria. All main offers for further training are done by different PI s in the nine 'cantons'of Austria. 2

3 Development and Background of Open Learning in the Austrian Educational System In order to gain insight into this pedagogical approach and the impact of change on the Austrian educational system, one needs to understand the background of the school system and the reasons for implementing open learning nowadays within the curriculum for teacher training. The system open learning appeared exactly 15 years ago [that s why we do celebrate right now the anniversary at our PI] when teachers from AHS2 and Mittelstufe3 were trying to bridge the gap between primary and secondary education by dealing with the question of informal learning and the transfer to formal lessons [i.e. Why do children learn easily when they are fascinated by certain facts and could this be transferred into the school environment? What can be expected from the students? Where are individual differences? ]. One result of these efforts was the understanding that children in primary class are very well capable of learning independently by fostering their unique interest and individual way of learning. Thus teachers started to adapt the evaluated teaching methods from primary school for secondary edcuation and in further consequence also for the teacher training. So the concept of open learning originally started in primary education and only at a later stage a theoretical approach was included and transferred to further education [teacher training]. Therefore we went back to the so called Reform pedagogy, specifically to the approach of Montessori [which has its origin in children s education]. By adapting the material to the theory of Montessori, the main idea of this approach forms the base for the open learning we teach at the PI. The difference for me between Montessori s approach and open learning is that the Montessori pedagogy represents a principle that needs to be implemented within the entire education [training, school]. In contrast, open learning can be individually adjusted by the teachers and trainers according to the needs identified and that is of course the main advantage for a system that still undergoes changes towards a new pedagogy [as it is now in Austria]. In principle the open learning approach enables the whole range of possibilities [including the old fashioned method of presenting content] while a Montessori approach obliges to take the whole package of free education: the student is forced to foster his/her own interests while open learning includes guidance adapted to the individual needs. How are your open learning pilots organized? In our pilot we had a minimum of goals described. These goals are fixed in the curriculum, which is obligatory by law. Therefore it cannot be changed, but it allows some flexibility in the didactical approach. In the curriculum the different tasks are registered. For these tasks we include several packages of material to work with, also including online possibilities. The student is obliged to fulfil some of the tasks in order to cover that part of the curriculum that is compulsory, while other tasks can be chosen according to the individual interest of each participant. The students have the choice of sequence, the kind of tool or material, the timing [which is valued a lot by the student] while they can also choose if and with whom they would like to collaborate. What is your experience in terms of collaboration between students? Despite that one would think open learning cannot include collaboration, the open learning approach rather fosters the team working skills within a group. I never experienced that only a few students do the work, as usually it is equally divided according to the abilities of the students. Therefore I would reckon that open learning procures also a very high social effect in education. Teamwork and co- 2 Explanation: type of school level from Explanation: type of school level from

4 operation is a very important part of open learning approaches as well as the communication [negotiating within groups on different tasks and objectives, development of common results, ]. Open learning therefore also fosters social skills, which increasingly gains importance in business life nowadays. How does open learning work in practice [and in your pilot in particular]? At school level one could introduce open learning already from the very beginning. Of course today the teacher has the advantage that most of the pupils know from primary education the principle of open learning. Most of them know the methods and are therefore aware of the expectations as well as the freedom they have. In the teacher training pilot we experienced a far more complex situation, since the trainers were not used to this learning approach. Also the students were not aware of their own responsibility as to the learning. Still, the same principle is valid for adults as well: they need to be aware of what is expected from them, where the lines of freedom are drawn. One main success factor of open learning is to clarify the expected performance [results] in the set framework. The expected results as well as the framework are usually fixed within the curriculum and are discussed between the trainer and the student. Settling the framework in our pilot included the agreement on the freedom to choose the learning methods, the specification of a topic, the sequences for the obligatory content and the amount of time for each topic. Still, the framework determined the expected result, the compulsory topics as well as a final date. One main advantage of open learning whether in school education or further education - is the possibility to have improved insight in the performance of each student. Therefore I consider feedback methods as very important. Using an open learning approach, the trainer or teacher is able to identify much earlier if a student has difficulties with the tempo or deficits in certain topics: a face-to-face open learning environment can much more easily detect if a student is not concentrated or that he/she is not able to keep up. Since the deficits and difficulties can very easily be identified, interventions can immediately take place. Thus the maximum of necessary support is offered by the teacher/trainer. This process of detecting deficits is far more complex within online environments. One main difficulty in our teacher training pilot was certainly the fact that we lost the overview of the progress as well as the deficits which we probably would have been able to bridge in a face-to-face environment. Without being aware of this fact we concentrated more on the tasks the students had to fulfil since that was easier to control, rather than on fostering the individual interests, topics and methods the students chose. Having reflected on this process of the pilot, the drift from an open learning approach to a very traditional learning structure became more and more evident towards the end of the course. For sure there are students for whom open learning is not the right approach since they need strong guidance by the trainer. In the same way there are also trainers who are not able to cope with the open learning approach, since it differs a lot from the traditional learning approach. The relationship between the trainer and the student is changing as far as the hierarchical structure is concerned, from a situation with the trainer as expert of content to student led education with the trainer in the role of supporter, coach or facilitator of learning. This change of role from the boss to a member of the team is not as simple as it might seem and it needs a lot of trust and respect with regard to the ability of the students. Although I support the open learning approach, I have to admit that for certain topics and goals a traditional approach can be more effective than the open learning approach. Hence, the strategy for the eak@demy and our open learning group contains a mixture of open learning and traditional learning. Still, we foster rather self-directed than teacher/trainer led education for as many topics as possible since open learning has the advantage of being much more motivating and effective. 4

5 What are the core competencies for teachers and trainers? Does open learning require different competencies? Certainly. In the traditional teaching one necessary competence for teachers and trainers is to explain things in a motivating, fascinating way. This is a core element for effective learning in a teacher led educational environment. In the open learning approach, the core competency is to let go the aspect of control. In the end it is anyhow only an apparent control: if there are 20 students who are apparently listening to what I say, it is easy to believe that all students are learning. We do believe that the students are learning, but very often it is not the case [That s what I call apparent control ]. Within the open learning approach one lacks this apparent control and the trainer needs to trust the student is fulfilling his/her tasks and taking over the responsibility for their own learning. The trainer of open learning within a face-to-face environment sees immediately if the tasks are fulfilled or not. As mentioned before, this is a more complex issue in the online environment, which we still have not solved as we experienced in the pilot. Still I am convinced that there are solutions for this issue. As a consequence of handing over the responsibility for learning to the student, a big advantage of open learning is to give the student the possibility to experience success. The student gets enormously motivated when he/she has mastered the tasks by him/herself, choosing his/her own individual method. The motivation comes from a completely different angle [from the student him/herself] than in the traditional learning where motivation has to come from the trainer. Hence the open learning methodology also fosters the self-confidence of the learner. Another essential factor for success, which I experienced within the open learning approach, is to explain in detail WHAT I do and justify WHY I choose this method. It is a big mistake to confront the students with open learning material without any explanations. I reckon that this is not dependent on the age of the student but has to bee seen in relation to the level of experience a student has with open learning. The more experience a student has with open learning, the easier he/she will pick up the concept and the new requirements of the training. One main competency for the teacher/trainer within the approach of open learning is the ability to assess and analyse the performance of each student. The correct analysis of each individual learner is essential for effective learning and the open learning approach enables the teacher to give this analysis. Feedback and analysis can be given in more detail than in traditional education. Gaps can immediately be identified and specific actions taken to bridge any deficits. In order to give detailed feedback one main competency of a trainer is the ability to summarize the learning processes within a clear picture of the performance of the student, including the topics he/she has chosen, the method preferred, the timing used and the results aimed for. Another interesting issue for teachers we experienced within several open learning experiments in the last year is the aspect of time management. During the period in which the student learns by him/herself, the teacher/trainer is not occupied with the active task of presenting the content. This situation of being passive as teacher is new for them, since the education is steered by the student. It represents for some teachers/trainers a difficult situation they have to cope with. The open learning trainer has to evolve: from an active role as a presenter of content to a passive supporting role: analysing the progress as well as the needs and facilitating the learning. This change from an active role to an apparently passive role as a supporter or coach is still difficult for open learning trainers. 5

6 What are the competencies for the students? Surely one key competency for students is to have a minimum of self-organization. Since the control of the learning lies in the hands of the student, he/she needs to have an idea of time management, coordinating both his/her professional and private obligations with the learning process. The student also needs to get an understanding of how he/she learns best. This means the student has to gain knowledge of his/her preferred methods for learning. In order to develop this ability, open learning needs to provide material for all senses. That means that all the different learning channels and learning styles should be addressed. One competency which develops during the open learning process is the understanding of what channel is the best in order to learn. [Do I prefer written documents, or audio files, discussions? ]. The student gains the competency to choose his/her own way and gets a clear view of what is needed for his/her learning. The PI fosters the use of computers in education, but we also refer to other sources.. The Internet is a rich source of material and experience shows that it is used a lot by the students, but still we consider it as an integrated part in the choice of tools for the open learning. Self-organization and the understanding of how to learn best are the two main possibilities for students to steer their own learning process [planning, place, preparation, what tools to use, sequence of the content, ]. Many students in Austria fail to finish their scientific studies [university] which is structured in a completely open way - because they did not learn at an earlier stage to steer their own learning process nor to get their learning organized. They come form a very strict and teacher s orientated educational school system and get pushed into the open learning approach of the universities. In this respect one has to point out the question why the school system manages to disperse the innate curiosity of pupils/students. One important element of open learning is to offer material within games. Playing is not only for children, but is also fostering the motivation of adults and therefore essential for the motivational aspect of learning. Material that is addressing all senses, is very motivating for the learner and the chance to have an in-depth experience with the material is much higher. To let the student choose him/herself the way, the timing and content fosters the motivation to deal with the material thus to learn in his/her preferred way. Where would you see advantages and issues of open learning? One antagonism in Austria is of course to have on the one hand a compulsory curriculum that binds the training to a defined content and on the other hand to have a student led education, having the student in the centre of his/her learning. Surely this represents a big issue for teachers and trainers. Each educational goal has its aims that need to be obtained. The solution for that is that the open learning would be settled in such a way that the aims would be fulfilled via an agreed and explained learning contract, meaning the learning goals will be reached although the student can choose his/her own timing and method. Still the trainer/teacher needs to fulfil the obligations set by the ministry, insuring for all training institutes the same topics and minimum levels. What is important to mention is that the open learning approach is not to be mixed up with the concept of projects. Projects are launched and have a specific aim but the outcome is not clearly defined. With the open learning approach the outcome is clearly set and contains agreed goals and outcomes [product]. So besides the much higher pedagogical value, the open learning approach is far easier to justify towards the curriculum, since the outcome is clearly defined. Thus traditional learning as well as open learning aims for the same outcome [to gain/apply knowledge] but they differ in the way on how to reach this aim [method] and I dare to say also in the quality of the outcome. 6

7 As long as we do have to provide a curriculum set by the ministry we also need to evaluate the learning results. Since the open learning method follows a different concept of gaining knowledge compared to the traditional learning, of course also the methods of evaluation differ. We are obliged to orientate ourselves according to the regulations set by the ministry, but of course a trainer is allowed to use different forms of outcomes and evaluation [like portfolios, learning goal orientated evaluation, peer evaluation, self-evaluation, group evaluation, ] as long as it is in agreement with the requirements of the inspectorate of the respective district. With the different approach to teaching, the methods of evaluation changed as well. In that way education and evaluation adapted to each other in a very logical way. If education moves away from teacher-orientated education, the forms of evaluation need to change as well. Hence the evaluation of open learning results is based on the outcome of individual results. Another difficulty/mistake is the assumption that all students are able to cope with open learning. At the very start of the open learning approach the teacher/trainer needs to check how well the students can handle their own learning process. One issue within our pilot was that the students differed a lot. While some students handled the open learning approach very well, others felt a bit lost. If the teacher/trainer discovers that the student needs a lot of guidance, he/she needs to point out offers and material in accordance with the identified needs. Only after a while the teacher/trainer will take back step-by-step his own input and leave the responsibility with the learner. As mentioned already, explanation needs to be given why and how the training is set up in that particular way. In the pilot we managed to communicate this, but we failed in the process of handing over the responsibility. Believing that the process needed to be guided and mentored, we got stuck in this guidance. The change of the teacher s/trainer s role is another issue. The roles of both the student and the teacher/trainer change and in further consequence the relationship to each other. We find ourselves in a time of change of paradigm but of course the longer one has been a teacher or trainer the more difficult it is to adapt to the new role of moderator, facilitator, coach or supporter of learning. This new approach is directed to working together, student and trainer. The trainer gives a first input [if necessary], the student starts working and if needed comes back if he/she needs support. But in between this process the student goes part of the way by him/her self. To leave the student alone with his/her learning needs trust from the trainer but also self-confidence of the student. Only if both ingredients, trust and self-confidence are there in a sufficient amount, open learning works out. An advantage resulting from this evolved role is the changed learning situation. The teacher/trainer represents not force and confrontation, but collaboration which builds of course a much more effective learning situation for all participants. The trainer takes the role of the one who collaborates and supports the learning. Apart from the high investment in time due to the fact that the trainer needs to follow each individual learner and his/her approach, there is also a high investment in producing materials or the buying of materials [i.e. software] if the open learning is implemented in a blended learning system [online and face-to-face meetings]. A lot of experience is necessary to have all the students organized, all the input prepared [material] and have an overview of the learning situation. Are some topics more appropriate for open learning than others? For sure some topics require more orientation by the teacher/trainer. Especially if the student has acquired no knowledge beforehand, the learning process is more dependent on the guidance of the trainer. Also in some situations the teacher would predefine the form of learning, in which case the education is rather led by the teacher who decides on the method of learning. For some topics e.g.. it is of big advantage to work in larger groups. This would oblige the student to work within the group although 7

8 he/she might have other preferences. For example if the learning aim is defined in the ability to discuss, the student needs to communicate with the members of the group. Thus in language education group work is rather obliging although the learner might prefer to work alone. Therefore I believe that open learning is perfect for topics with clear answers. Still, the open learning approaches we structure in the PI foster different forms of learning [single work as well as collaboration in a blended learning environment], since it is also necessary for keeping up motivation: if the training only offers an open learning approach it will get boring and exhausting for a student. We realized in several pilots that open learning forms are considered as very intense [in the sense of exhausting] for students as well as for the teachers/trainers. Therefore we foster a mixture, aiming at having the student taking over the responsibility for his/her learning in a learning environment with agreed upon borders, but also sequences of traditional learning. The preparation time for an open learning approach is much higher than with traditional learning which usually refers to one single book. Most students and trainers still believe that traditional learning is more efficient in time and this assumption is for sure correct if one considers the preparation time, the time one needs to follow each student and the individual evaluations. Although more time is required for the open learning environment, the student learns more effectively and by far more adapted to his/her individual needs. As an asset to open learning, the student gets an understanding of how to learn best from available resources. Since this ability has become increasingly important the open learning forms are gaining in popularity in the schooling system as well. How can ICT get embedded in an open learning approach? One can answer this question from two different perspectives. Seen from the perspective of an open learning approach the computer is only one tool of many. As mentioned already, an open learning approach fosters education making use of all senses. Therefore we aim to offer as much learning material as possible. Of course the computer and the Internet offer a lot of well-presented information and resources for the student and his/her learning but it is [mostly] restricted to reading and listening. Therefore the mixture of online and face-to-face periods is very important for us, simply in order to offer the full range of possibilities. Looking from the perspective of online learning, the open learning approach seems to be perfect, since an etutor is not in the position of controlling the presence of the learner, the amount of learning or the planning..while a traditional trainer can decide on presence and breaks of the students, an online tutor does not have this possibility and thus needs to rely on the own responsibility of the student. So the reason why elearning is closely connected with open learning is a rather dull motivation and holds the danger that the potential of open learning will get restricted to online resources. How far were the preconditions given [learning contract]? The tutor pre-determined topics as well as the final deadlines. The students had some time to decide individually what was of special interest for each of them. According to the identified interests groups were formed. Still we experienced after a while that the specifications of topics from each student restricted them a lot in working commonly together. The more specialized the topics were, the more difficult it became to identify common topics to work on. In addition the learning contract included a number of criteria. For example for some tasks we predefined that a presentation should be given [but with the choice of the format by the student] which had to include specified aspects [i.e. other learners have to profit as well : handouts, presentations, paper, ]. With the contract the expected result and time of this outcome was clearly defined, but not the format or the way the learner reaches this outcome. 8

9 I consider it as a key success factor within an open learning environment to draw clear lines..by defining these clearly the learner understands the extent of freedom he/she has. Only if the expectations as well as the lines are clear the student has the opportunity to choose between various options which enable him/her to develop his/her knowledge.. What measures are taken if the learner does not meet the requirements? If the requirements set are not reached the same consequences are taken as usual: one discusses the problems and issues and looks for further support and solutions. If the education is finished off with a certificate, the learner possibly has failed. Open learning does not exclude the fact that a learner is not able to reach the requested minimum of expectations. Since I am teaching adults as well as pupils, I do not see the success of open learning related to the age of a learner, rather than with the level of experience gained already within open learning. By this I mean that the more intensively and longer a learner has organized his/her learning with an open learning approach, the longer the way he/she has been able to go alone during the learning process. The learner is in the position to take more responsibility the more he/she is experienced and aware of the open learning concept. Still I think that the preparation period for open learning is shorter for adults than with children since adults acknowledge the importance of learning. They are also used to acting in a responsible way, even in a different setting and not necessarily in a learning environment. What would you consider as the most important issues in open learning? I would think of three major issues connected with open learning: Open learning has to do with respect towards the learner and his/her preferences, as well as his selfdirected approach. What I consider as essential is that the learning addresses all senses with different materials, giving the learner/student the possibility to experience his/her preferences and thus maximise the effectiveness of the learning. The different input addressing all senses is highly influential in the motivation as well as the selfconfidence of the learner and plays therefore an essential role in the open learning approach. Using open learning the teacher/trainer has to be able to cope with the change of roles and the different approach towards the learner/student. Open learning does not mean to have no requirements nor learning goals but have the student determine specification of a topic, the planning, the method and ways of presentation and evaluation. In the same way the student needs to be able to organize his/her learning balancing needs and interests with the individual situation of the day-to-day life. Open learning requires the trust of the trainer in the self-organization and responsibility of the learner as well as the ability to act as a supporter, coach and facilitator of learning. The reason why I mainly organize blended learning and a mixture of open learning and traditional learning is because designing the education exclusively within the open learning approach gets dreary for the learner/student and is also too demanding for both, students and teachers. Therefore the presentation of content like in traditional education is necessary as well. Using open learning does integrate different methods and tools. It does not completely ban the presentation of content but neither uses exclusively the Internet. Open learning approaches rather enable all opportunities possible for a student to ensure effective individual learning. Hence it represents a concept which offers a mixture of tools and methods a student is allowed to choose from. 9