How can we enhance institutional “virtual” learning spaces for the mobile learner?

How can we enhance institutional “virtual” learning spaces for the mobile learner?

If we assume that the Blackboard Learning Environment is part of the virtual learning space, then how can a course instructor design their course to be more open to the mobile learner?

I'm going to try to suggest some answers to the above questions through a number of posts on this blog. I'll also be asking colleagues at University of Bristol and other institutions to help develop the discussion. For instance,

• What are these emerging learning spaces?
• How might we define the institutional space? Based on current patterns what learning activities are likely to be undertaken in these spaces?
• Why should we consider the mobile learning aspect?
• How can we design our Blackboard courses to become more open to the mobile learner?

So, let us start with the first question, what are these emerging learning spaces?

At a recent conference Peter Hartley presented a framework to investigate the emergence of different online learning spaces for students and challenges for the different stakeholders with this emerging model.

One of the principles of this new model is the shift in ownership towards the student, where they are taking more responsibility the process of their learning. In other words, with the increase in availability of web based tools combined with the increasingly sophisticated and personalised use of these by students (Student Expectations Study (JISC, 2007)) then the traditional model of an institution providing all the required online tools is being seriously questioned. The emergence of the next generation virtual learning environment (or even a personal learning environment) is depicted in Figure 1.

Figure 1:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/43806301@N00/380939661/ 

Two important observations can be made from Figure 1, firstly, the trend within the tools, for instance, the inclusion of myspace, youtube, flickr, as well as other file stores. Secondly, the more diverse but interconnected these tools then the student can develop and maintain more diverse social networks.

So accounting for this interms of learning spaces then Peter Hartley suggests three distinct spaces (see Figure 2). It is very important to observe that these overlap at the margins. Also these maps differ for the different types of students (age, discipline, experience), and the interaction between the learning spaces will create tensions and need to be managed.

Figure 2:

 

If we starting to unpick the characteristics of these spaces then the,

• Institutional space is provided by the institution to promote and manage the online teaching and learning experience. This would include institutional VLEs, online assessment systems, ePortfolios and even institutional blogs, wikis and other social networking tools.
• Playground space is often provided by third party suppliers where the emphasis is on social networking, and collaboration. This is controlled by the student, in the sense of the tools they use, the groups they form and the activities which are undertaken.
• Refuge space is very much focused on the individual space, where the student can report, record, observe and reflect. This space will include online and offline tools.

The use of this framework will easily allow us to map the needs of the mobile learner in various authentic learning situations. For instance, if we think of a placement student who is away from campus for a few months collecting data in the field, then they may have the following needs;

• Access course information
• Communicate with their supervisors on their progress, in particular share material that has been captured, and their interpretations. So they will need to manage and store data, while making notes and reflections.
• Communicate with other people, peers, friends, family and mentors. The aim of this communication will be both personal and professional.

Given the multiple audiences that the placement student needs to engage with and the use of the mobile device (not a desktop or laptop) then the student is likely to want to control the software that is used. As opposed to having it locked away within the institutional software. Therefore, the likelihood is that much of the information and activity will be undertaken in the play ground and refuge learning spaces, for instance, on private blogs, image sites, and file repositories.

Against this it would also be argued that due to economies of scale the supervisor may wish to use the institutional software to manage their interface with the placement student. They may also wish to have an archive of the interactions. Therefore, the academic may favour the use of the institutional space as opposed to trying to manage the diversity of the student controlled spaces.

This is relatively easily accommodated within the Blackboard (and other VLEs), through the use of rss technologies, folders, changes to the navigation and being aware of which tools work more effectively with mobile devices and then optimising their use. Figure 3 outlines the flow of information between the spaces.

Figure 3:

The later part of this discussion will be addressed in more depth in later posts.

links: digg this    del.icio.us    technorati    reddit