Learning Processes - redesigning Learning Design

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Post Workshop WS-LT 2010-01-11

Learning Processes - redesigning Learning Design

Learning processes need to be modular, they need to be flexible, they need to easily adopted, changed and re-purposed. To achieve that we need a much more flexible way of specifying the different activities necessary to foster learning processes.

This is a first draft proposal trying to outline a few ideas on how activities could be modelled to be a part of a learning process, and to meet many of the needs for a flexible way for modelling processes. The goal of this contribution is to start a discussion on how we should model the next generation of learning activities and how to model learningprocesses - it is also my experience that it is easier to discuss a topic when there is and example to be discussed, hopefully this contribution will foster such discussions.

A learning process could be utterly complex and utterly simple. From modelling a complete study program and curricula for K12 to a simple activity such as viewing a picture and having a discussion on specific aspects of that picture.

Based on this I propose the following simple model:

  1. An activity is part of a learning process, and a learning process could be used as an activity.
  2. An activity is only a «container» of pointers to relevant information
  3. Activity object should have the following information
    • Identifier
  4. Activity object could have the following information
    • Pointer to successor (activity or learning-process)
    • Pointer to rule for choice of successor
    • Pointer to resource (Learning resource or other)
    • Pointer to content-produced/results (wiki/content produced/discussions/etc...)
  5. Learning process contains the following information
    • Identifier
    • Pointer to an activity object or learning process

With this model it should be possible to revisit a learning activity and to continue to develop content produced with a new perspective based on what have been experienced in other activities, and by that demonstrating new insight or gained knowledge...

One important principle is that there should be a clear separation of logic between:

  • the learning process structure and activities,
  • (learning) resources used
  • content produced
    • Discussions (Audio/Video/Text)
    • Chats (Audio/Video/Text)
    • Wiki pages
    • Blog posts
    • Assessments
    • Other deliverables
  • Successor rules

Based on this model a learning process could look like this:

This model should follow semantic web principles, and be processable by semantic web tools.

Enter labels to add to this page:
Please wait 
Looking for a label? Just start typing.

Comments (4)

 

  1. Jan 08, 2010

    Tore Hoel says:

    In the first model, would Activity Output be a better label than Content(s) Prod...

    In the first model, would Activity Output be a better label than Content(s) Produced. The output could be other than 'content' (learning resources?); it could also be Achievements (evidence records), etc. And what is the difference between a Resource(s) and Content(s) produced as output of an activity?

    1. Jan 11, 2010

      Erlend Øverby says:

      I was thinking that a "resource" is something that is consumed, and that "activi...

      I was thinking that a "resource" is something that is consumed, and that "activity output" is something that is produced. In my view it is also important that that the "output" should have the possibility of being developed/enhanced from other activities. So that there could be a possibility to track/show/demonstrate knowledge building...

  2. Jan 08, 2010

    Adam Cooper says:

    Hi Erlend, I am not sure what the intended use for this would be so I am not com...

    Hi Erlend, I am not sure what the intended use for this would be so I am not comfortable in making specific comments.

    However, here is a potentially-provocative alternative idea:

                What about the IDEF0 as an alternative formulation? (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDEF0). Each activity has input, output, control, and mechanism.

     Cheers, Adam

    1. Jan 10, 2010

      Erlend Øverby says:

      Hi Adam. The intended use for my suggestion is to start a discussion on how we ...

      Hi Adam.

      The intended use for my suggestion is to start a discussion on how we better could describe learning-designs or learning-processes that could be processed by computers - how we provide guidance on the sequencing of events and activities that have sufficient flexibility to reflect the real world, and that are easy to model by teachers/educators, and used by learners/students...

      I think we first should have a discussion on the nature of a learning processes? and if we agree that we have a model that have input,output,control and a set of references to "objects" outside the activities - then we could look at tools for representing that.

      My attempt is to start a discussion, I have no answers - only some ideas that I'm sharing.

      Erlend

      1. Anonymous replies:

        You are not logged in. Any changes you make will be marked as anonymous. You may want to Log In if you already have an account. You can also Sign Up for a new account.
        CAPTCHA image

Add Comment