Recent publications contributed to by members of the LTD team

This list of publications co-authored by a variety of members of the IET LTD team is generated by the script created by  @chris_s_yates. See the video on the Open Research Online Help Pages if you want to do this for an ORO search of interest to you.  One advantage of using this method is that the rsults will update as new publications are added to ORO. Another is that the ORO adavanced search allows a variety of the diferent types of searches to be done, e.g. it can be conigured to return just books by particular authors.

Currently the script returns just the first 10 results, but Chris is looking to add the ability to specify the result length.

By the way, I would have added a link to a page about the LTD (Learning and teaching development) team, but there isn’t one on the IET site any more. There used to be one I’m sure!

Posted in widgets | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Visualising the process and products of learning design

I will be at CAL ’09 next week in Brighton, and am looking forward to it, in particular some of the sessions and papers which include work from the JISC Curriculum design call. For example, the “challenges of the design pattern paradigm” session and other learning design papers/session. In the meantime I thought I’d put up the poster that my colleagues and I have put together, This poster  entitled “Visualising the process and and products of learning design” will be presented at CAL ’09. It  is a very short synopsis of the visualisation and representation work we’ve been doing here at the OU. A  version of the poster itself is available for download (click on the image to see a low resoultion image of the poster, or on one of the  links to see a higher resolution PDF at either A4 or A0 size):

Image showing “Visualising the process and and products of learning design ” poster Visualising the process and and products of learning design, A0 sze  (pdf, 1.9 Mbyte),  Visualising the process and and products of learning design, A4 size (pdf, 1.1 Mbyte).

Also, a draft of the text of the poster (including the abstract and references) is available here.

Can visual representation work at the curriculum level?

Apart from the design patterns and learning design stuff, one of the other things I would like to explore whilst at the conference is if or how visual representations have been used at programme level (or above). As far as I’m aware, most visual representation work has focused on the activity or course level, and describes interactions involving students and teachers.  But what about the curriculum level? I’m keen to talk to anyone working in this area: please do  contact me if you are, or add a comment below, thanks :-)

CAL ’09 poster text

Abstract

Teachers and media developers go through a complex decision making process when designing new learning experiences – working towards an effective pedagogical mix, combining resources, tools, student and tutor support. For an individual media developer or teacher, the process of creating a visual map of a learning activity clarifies their own understanding of the mix. For teams comprised of individuals focused on different aspects, a visual representation supports communication about issues that need to be resolved before the activity is delivered to students.

This paper focuses on the development of CompendiumLD, a particular strand of work within the OU Learning Design Initiative. CompendiumLD is a tool to represent and visualise learning designs; it is an adaptation of Compendium, an existing knowledge mapping tool. CompendiumLD has been developed iteratively, informed by evidence gathered through a series of interviews with academics, and tested through a series of faculty based workshops. Development has proceeded from changes in the set of icons used to represent components of learning activities, through to specific functionality to support the design of learning activities. This functionality includes context specific learning design help and a set of visual design templates.

Findings to date indicate that most users find the tool easy to use, that it makes the process more explicit and provides a useful vehicle for sharing design ideas with others. Some users are interested in its potential to support both the process of learning design and the production of maps for use by students.

Recently introduced  features include (1) the facility to specify times that students and tutors will spend on specific tasks, producing a running total displayed on the user interface and (2) support for transclusions (intended to help designers  identify reuse of  e.g. tasks or learning objectives. Initial evaluations of these new features will be discussed.

1       Introduction

A learning activity can be conceptualised as a specific interaction of learner(s) with zero or more other(s) using specific tools and resources, orientated towards specific outcomes (Beetham, 2007).  Evidence we have gathered indicates that designing learning activities is inherently messy, creative and iterative, and that choosing  the best combination of tools, resources and tasks for a particular context is difficult (Conole et al., 2008). In the Open University and other distance universities, design is typically carried out by teams composed of people with a variety of specialist skills including academics, programmers, graphic designers, editors and project managers.

2       Aims

Our aim is to research, design and implement a range of tools to support individuals to design effective learning activities, and to enhance the effectiveness of design teams.

One approach we have taken is to apply the concept of ‘knowledge cartography’  to learning design, building on previous work in this area including other visual representations of learning designs (e.g. UML activity diagrams, LAMS).  This has led to the development of a software tool CompendiumLD through which we are exploiting two aspects of mapping, the product and the process.

  • As products maps can visually represent complex relationships between objects, which highlight key elements and connections for a particular purpose
  • Creating a map forces a person to externalise their understanding of the situation, and this process clarifies their understanding of the situation

(Okada, Buckingham Shum, & Sherborne, 2008).

Design processes

In our research  to date we have studied how design  is carried out by individuals and teams within the iterative design cycle which occurs before courses are launched.

We will be studying how CompendiumLD can be used by teachers to  deliver teaching activities, and how it can be used to evaluate the design of activities.

Design products

Snapshots from the design process

The learning design nodes are on the left hand side: these can be dragged and droped onto the working area. Learning design nodes include

Learning activity

Learning outcome

The nodes can be connected by dragging between them.

Double-clicking on a learning activity opens it

A screen grab of CompendiumLD showing the main working area labelled  “Andrew Brasher’s Home Window”.

Context sensitive prompts appear when nodes are added.

3       Evidence

Empirical evidence gathered to inform the development of CompendiumLD  includes the collection of user requirements (Nixon, 2007), case studies (Wilson, 2007), 12 semi-structured in-depth interviews, and evaluation of workshops and focus groups (Cross, 2008). In January 2009 we began in-depth evaluation of holistic course design, which has and will involve studying course teams’ use of visual representations during the design process over a period of 9 months.  Examples from our evidence base are shown as speech bubbles.

4       In use

Examples illustrating how CompendiumLD can be used within the design process are provided by  snapshot 1 and snapshot 2. Snapshot 1 illustrates an early stage of the  the design process, snapshot 2 a later stage when a more detailed description has been generated and some of the issues that arose in snapshot 1 have been resolved.

5       Conclusions and future work

The qualitative data we have gathered so far indicates that generating a visual representation helps to clarify designers’ intentions, and aids communication of those intentions.  Continuation of the iterative improvement of the tools and methods we have developed is planned for 2009-10, including trials across a range of UK universities. So far our work has focused on the representation of learning activities within a course or module. We will be looking at applying visual representations at different levels, e.g. across degree programmes, and requirements gathering workshops to inform this are planned for later in 2009.

References and further information

Full references for the citations in this poster are available from are available from http://www.open.ac.uk/blogs/brasherblog. Information about CompendiumLD is available from http://compendiumld.open.ac.uk.

Beetham, H. (2007). An approach to learning activity design. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: designing and delivering  e-learning (pp. 26-40). Oxford: Routledge.

Conole, G., Brasher, A., Cross, S., Weller, M., Clark, P., & White, J. (2008). Visualising learning design to foster and support good practice and creativity. Educational Media International.

Cross, S., Conole, G., Clark, P., Brasher, A., & Weller, M.   . (2008). Mapping a landscape of Learning Design: Identifying key trends in current practice at the Open University. Paper presented at the LAMS Conference.

Nixon, S. (2007). LD project final report – final report of the LD VLE programme work. Milton Keynes: The Open University.

Okada, A., Buckingham Shum, S., & Sherborne, T. (2008). Knowledge Cartography: Software Tools and Mapping Techniques: Springer.

Wilson, P. (2007). Progress report on capturing eLearning case studies (Internal report). Milton Keynes: The Open University.

Posted in compendium, learning design | Tagged | 1 Comment

Java Interfaces used as types

Here are some notes I have made about using Java Interfaces as types, prompted by my initial confusion about the concept,  a discussion with Michele Bachler,  and reading this and this (thanks to both web sites and Michelle for helping to clarify this stuff).

A method which is specified to return an interface type can return an object of any type (class) that implements that interface.

So if an interface (e.g. Interface A) specifies a method signature in which the method should return an interface type (e.g. Interface B) , then any classes that implement  Interface A must provide a method which returns an object which implements Interface B. This returned object can be of any type, so long as it implements Interface B.

For example, from the Compendium code, the IServiceManager interface specifies

/**    Look for a free node service in the relevant cache, else create a new service, and return it.    **/

public INodeService getNodeService();

and this IServiceManager interface is implemented  by the ServiceManager class, e.g. via this method

public INodeService getNodeService() {

    String sName = “”;

    NodeService node = null; /** NodeService implements INodeService **/

    <snip>…Lots of code removed </snip>

    return node;  /** This is the node object which implements the INodeService  interface**/

}

Posted in compendium | Tagged | Leave a comment

Timing information in CompendiumLD

I have been working on a new feature for CompendiumLD which allows the user (designer) to specify how long they expect each task within an activity will take. Using this new feature the designer can specify that a particular task for a learner  ( e.g. the task “Read, and comment on others’ work” shown in this briefing paper) will take, say 1 hour. Similarly, the time that tasks to be performed by teachers and others can be specified. CompendiumLD will keep a running total of the time to be spent by each”actor” i.e. each student or  teacher,  hence helping the designer to keep the workload of both in mind as they design the activity.

I have completed the user interface for this feature and am now implementing the database functionality to store the timing information. Here is a screen shot (click on the screenshot to enlarge it) :

Learning activity map showing timing information

and here is a movie which demonstrates this  timing feature in use:

Movie demonstrating timing information functionality for CompendiumLD.


Posted in compendium, learning design | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Video annotation in Compendium – applications in learning design?

Simon Buckingham-Shum has recently described early work which will enable a user to annotate a video within Compendium.  He writes that this development will enable

“not only the usual temporal annotation of video, but adding a spatial dimension so that choreography researchers/practitioners/students can position annotations in specific locations, appearing/disappearing within specific time-windows, and linked within and between clips”.

This functionality is being developed to support dance choreography, but I think it could be used to support the sequencing of steps and movements in other  domains. In particular, I am thinking about our use of Compendium as a tool to support teachers and media developers  design learning activities, i.e. CompendiumLD.

The  questions I’m thinking about are

How could annotation of a video be used in the learning design process?

and more interestingly,

How could the annotation functionality provided by this new Compendium feature be used, given that it will enable the creation of annotations  that are ‘hypertext nodes, embedded in an arbitrary number of other views and conversations, possibly linked to whole new networks, possibly with their own annotated movies’? Nb. another quote from Simon’s post

Here are some ideas:

  • A course module has been successfully deliver face-to-face for many years. Could this module be delivered successfully on-line? To investigate this, a video of a face-to-face teaching/learning session could be annotated with the tools (e.g. wikis, blogs, and so on) that would be used to deliver different  parts of the session in an on-line environment.
  • A video sequence is used as part of a learning activity, but some learners do not  reach the activity’s intended learning outcome. Annotation of the learning design (created using CompendiumLD) and of the video could be to investigate the problem, e.g. to examine how additional material could be provided within or in addition to the video to support the learners.

Anyhow, I think this is a really interesting development, and I intend to have a play with it but probably will not get the time until early next year.  In the meantime if any one has any other suggestions for using this feature within learning design, do please add a comment.
By they way, there’s some more info about the project which has been driving the annotation work here: e-dance project.

Posted in compendium, learning design | Tagged | Leave a comment

Widget requirements

I’ve just seen that the W3cC have recently published a document which describes “design goals and requirements that a specification would need to address in order to standardize various aspects of widgets”: Widgets 1.0: Requirements. Widgets are “small client-side Web applications for displaying and updating remote data, that are packaged in a way to allow download and installation on a client machine, mobile phone, or mobile Internet device”.  A widget  spec could be very useful when the CloudWorks work gets going.

The document looks reasonable and  complete  at first glance, though I’m stil puzzling over the need for both R24 and R25.

Posted in learning design | Tagged | 1 Comment

LAMS conference, Cadiz, 26th June

Finally got connected to wi-fi (not too difficult, but more so than it should be), so can start blogging. These are notes taken as the presentations occurred…..

Stephen Downes keynote

Stephen Downes ( super-blogger ) is just about to start his keynote. He’s started, and is recording his talk so it’ll be available later.

Presentation title: What learning design could be. LD now is creating activities, dragging activities into a sequence, i.e a sequential process, with conditions and loops. There’s a parallel between software design and learning design cf. integrated development environment. However, choice of activities is limited e.g. forum discussion, read. My take on what Stephen’s saying is that curently learning design is actually teaching design. Newterm to me = ‘Prosumer’ – a producer who is also a consumer of content as in bloggers, wikiers, blog commenters etc. Nice shorthand!

A next step for learning design: co-creation of learning designs by learners Talking about Gliffy an online diagram editor, entirely web based. All procesing happens server side, only need a flash plugin in your browser to use. Users can co-create and edit diagrams simultaneouly ala web 2.0 modus-operandi.No need to work out who’s got the latest version coz it’s the one you’re both (all) editing.

Aside – Stephen talks up single sign on, as in open-id; my question is does everyone want single sign on? I don’t think I do, I wnat to reduce the number of times I need to sign on, but I want and use different ids for different purposes. I like the idea of having the option of a single sign on, so I can e.g. opt to have say two sign-ons, rather than the myriad I have now. I wouldn’t want to be forced to adopt a siggle sign on. Am I alone in this?

Talking about differences between social networks and groups. Groups have closed membership, albeit virtual. A network can build and evolve through connections between individuals. Groups have a shared understanding, and objectives. A network’s aims and objectives evolve through interaction.

So how does this affect learning design? An example which typifies the difference is showing vs doing. A classroom setting is a group environment. Typically offer list of choices rather that offering totally open, free way forward , decided by the learners.

Arrg! lost wi-fi connection and about 5 mins worth of typing….

Key to web 2.0 is that the environment for your work is the entire internet. Learning design will move towards the original vision of learning objects, where objects where envisoned to have state and behaviour (or properties and functions as Stephen put it). Evolution of learning design seems to be following evolution of software design e.g. move towards object-oriented encapsulated state and behaviour.

Grainne’s keynote

I took a short vieo clip but Ou’s wordpress tells me “File type does not meet security guidelines. Try another.” …. why o why!

Posted in learning design | Tagged | Leave a comment

Microsoft to support the Open Document Format in Word etc.

Hooray, Microsoft is going to ‘support’ ODF v1.1 in Word, Excel etc. (see http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2008/may08/05-21ExpandedFormatsPR.mspx, and http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20080521092930864). I think that’s great news. No need to deal with two competing standards!

Posted in schema | Leave a comment

Tag cloud for our learning design LAMS conference paper

To amuse myself I’ve just put the text of our paper “CompendiumLD – a tool for effective, efficient and creative learning design” through the tag cloud generator at http://tagcrowd.com. Here’s the result; it’s not that surprising I suppose, though I didn’t realise that we’d used ‘providing’ so frequently!

activities additional approach compendium compendiumld conole context create creativity current describe design development different discuss drop effective efficiency enable evaluation existing figure functionality further include information initial learning map means node particular process providing requirements resources search select shared specific stencil support system tasks tool type user view web work

created at TagCrowd.com

Posted in learning design | Tagged | Leave a comment

“Reading visual images”: another DAISY DTB produced from Openlearn material

I’ve generated another DAISY DTB from Openlearn material. I was invited to attend a meeting of the OU’s Digital Audio Project yesterday, and the discussion there started me thinking about how different media could be delivered to enhance learning using a DTB reader. Anyway, I generated a DTB version of course DD100_6 “Reading visual images” to help me think about images.

Is inclusion of an alternative text description of an image useful enough for many purposes?

If so, what should the nature of this description be? Are existing guidelines sufficient?

When is more than alternative text required?

I’ll need to get to grips with existing guidelines such as the OU’s own Adding images and figures and TechDis’s Introduction to Best Practice with Images. Mary suggests that Business School units have their alt text written by a group of expert ALs, and that the images within their units are often diagrammatic, so I might have a look at one of these to get started.
Other usability issues include the use of voices (synthesised or real) within a book, i.e. how can multiple voices be used effectively e.g. different voices for quotes, questions and answers?
The DTB is available from here: DTB of OpenLearn course unit “Reading visual images” (DD100_6).

Posted in Accessibility | Tagged , | 2 Comments