Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Utilizamos tu perfil de LinkedIn y tus datos de actividad para personalizar los anuncios y mostrarte publicidad más relevante. Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de publicidad en cualquier momento.

5 Things You Should Know About CLE Models and Strategies

825 visualizaciones

Publicado el

This publication represents the work of graduate students in the Instructional Design and Technology (IDT) program at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. The learning task involved selecting a constructivist-based pedagogical model or instructional strategy and writing a 2-page pedagogy brief that addresses the 5 Things You Need to Know About this pedagogy or instructional strategy, namely:
(1) What is it?
(2) How does it work?
(3) Who is doing it?
(4) How effective is it?
(5) What are its implications for instructional design?

Publicado en: Diseño
  • Sé el primero en comentar

5 Things You Should Know About CLE Models and Strategies

  1. 1. 5 THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT… Constructivist Pedagogical Models and Instructional Strategies GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND TECHNOLOGY (IDT) PROGRAM
  2. 2. Introduction This publication represents the work of graduate students in the Instructional Design and Technology (IDT) program at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. The learning task involved selecting a constructivist-based pedagogical model or instructional strategy and writing a 2-page pedagogy brief that addresses the 5 Things You Need to Know About this pedagogy or instructional strategy, namely: (1) What is it? (2) How does it work? (3) Who is doing it? (4) How effective is it? (5) What are its implications for instructional design? Twenty-three students participated in this activity in the fall semester of 2015 resulting in 16 briefs on pedagogical models and 7 briefs on instructional strategies. Selections included Cognitive Apprenticeship, Cognitive FlexibilityHypertexts, Communities of Practice, Goal Based Scenarios, Problem Based Learning, Situated Learning, Virtual Learning Environments, Authentic Learning Activities, Collaboration and Social Negotiation, Game-Based Learning, Role Playing, and Scaffolding. The writing of these briefs enabled students to examine constructivist-based pedagogical models and instructional strategies, describe their theoretical principles and instructional characteristics and discuss their implications for the design of problem solving learning environments (PSLEs) through research based practice. We hope you find these briefs informative and useful for the design of PSLEs. Nada Dabbagh, PhD. Professor & Director Division of Learning Technologies George Mason University Fairfax, VA, USA May 20, 2016 This publication maybe cited as: Dabbagh, N., David, L., Morgan, L., Campbell, A., Huber, B., Ahmed, N., … Butsay, A. (2016). 5 Things You Need to Know About Constructivist-Based Pedagogical Models and Instructional Strategies. Available from: http://www.slideshare.net/NadaDabbagh/5- things-you-should-know-about-cle-models-and-strategies ix
  3. 3. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................................................ix Dr. Nada Dabbagh ..................................................................................................................................ix PART 1: PEDAGOGICAL MODELS COGNITIVE APPRENTICESHIP (CA) Leslie David ............................................................................................................................................ 4 Laura Morgan..........................................................................................................................................8 COGNITIVE FLEXIBILITY HYPERTEXTS (CFH) Anne Campbell .......................................................................................................................................12 Brenda Huber ........................................................................................................................................16 COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE (COP) Nashrah Ahmed .....................................................................................................................................20 Chunhua Xiong......................................................................................................................................24 GOAL BASED SCENARIOS (GBS) Dan Jackson ..........................................................................................................................................28 Katelyn Schreyer....................................................................................................................................32 PROBLEM BASED LEARNING (PBL) Sakon Kieh.............................................................................................................................................36 Evgeniy Lekarev.................................................................................................................................... 40 Candido Mendes....................................................................................................................................44 Rebecca Szymanski ............................................................................................................................... 48 William Wick..........................................................................................................................................52 SITUATED LEARNING (SL) Shakila Anwari ......................................................................................................................................56 Katrina Rainer.......................................................................................................................................60 VIRTUAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS (VLES) Tonya Hutson.........................................................................................................................................65 PART 2: INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES AUTHENTIC LEARNING ACTIVITIES Jennifer Kleiner .....................................................................................................................................69 COLLABORATION AND SOCIAL NEGOTIATION Ellen Brown .......................................................................................................................................... 74 Jerry Prewitt ......................................................................................................................................... 77 GAME BASED LEARNING Adam Strawn..........................................................................................................................................81 ROLE PLAYING Dustin Norwood.....................................................................................................................................84 SCAFFOLDING Doug Baldwin........................................................................................................................................88 Anna Butsay...........................................................................................................................................93
  4. 4. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF Cognitive Apprenticeship What is it? Cognitive apprenticeship is taking the traditional model of apprenticeship where the student was taught by a master ofthe craft and, learned the skills in a hands-on performance way. Tacit knowledge was involved to teach the “tips and tricks” of the trade. Cognitive apprenticeship involves applying the process to cognitive skills. Learners are invited into the actualknowledge domains and learn to perform these practices as apprentices or interns. It involves the showing and telling characteristics of apprenticeship where the learners work with experts, and where the showing is the modeling and the telling is the explaining so the student learns where and when to apply the knowledge. In this way students gradually learn the skills and ultimately perform at master level. By learning to perform these skills the apprentice is also brought into the community ofpractice. Additionally, apprentices learn when to apply the skills in the correct situations during actual practice. Cognitiveapprenticeship involves the use of technology to enable reflection, articulation and exploration. How does it work? Characteristics of cognitive apprenticeship are: □ Modeling and explaining expertperformance □ Extensive mentoring andcoaching □ Scaffolding □ Focusing on performance mastery of the specificskill domain □ Working from simple to complexproblems □ Collaborative learning within the communityof practitioners □ Articulation and reflection on performance □ Active participation in learning the skillset □ Less supervision (fading) as the student approaches masterylevel Modeling involves experts performing tasks so students can watch and create a conceptual model of the process. Coaching involves the expert observing or monitoring the student’s performance while they are performing GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY LESLIE DAVID the skill and can provide feedback in the form of scaffolding. Scaffoldingprovides any hints or assistance to the learner. Articulation provides an opportunity for the learner to articulate in words and actions their knowledge; reflection provides the opportunity to compare their efforts to other cognitive apprentices or the experts in the field. Exploration allowsthe learner to explore how to develop and carry out solutions. Who is doing it? Cognitive apprenticeship is a paradigm for teaching a fairly complex task to students. It is not used to teach any rote task. It has been used in the more traditional sense by medical students, law students as interns, and by instructional design students in a project between a university and a corporate business. Cognitive apprenticeship is being used by teachers to teach reading, writing, and mathematical skills in primary, secondary and college level education courses. It is used in the science, technology, mathematical and engineering fields at the post graduate level. It is being used in corporate training in order to situate problem solving in the context that the learner will actively use in everyday life as a way of avoiding the overly structured problems where the learner is unable to make the jump from those types of problems to actual problem solving. It is being used by Dutch vocational schools. Dutch schools range from short, verypractical prevocational and vocational education (comparable to American vocational high schools to a 6-year academic program that permits entrance to a university study. It is being used in the Department of Transportation to teach bridge inspection by utilizing a virtual bridge where the students have to perform inspection procedures. This was developed by a former graduate of this program. http://dotnet.dot.gov/news/stories/2015/10/2015- 10- 30-nhi-innovation.html. How effective is it? This section is totally subjective. How effective is cognitive apprenticeship? I would say very effective based on the increased use in education and training. The use of web and online course materials allow E D I T 7 3 0
  5. 5. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Cognitive Apprenticeship cognitive apprenticeship to be used in more and more fields and to minimize the time away from their desks, more and more companies and universities are going to online training as an alternative to traditional training classes since they have the advantage of being taken anywhere, anytime and linking the learners to collaborate and share information through forums, blogs, online chats using a variety of online tools. The use of being able to observe a master user, understand what and how they do, through communication, create a scaffolding to understand theprocess, to practice the skill and received coaching and feedback from an expert, instructor, or peers. In Collins, et. al.,they referenced a pilot study to test the efficacy of reciprocal reading. They tested four groups and all showed very large percentages of improvement with little decrease after aperiod of time. The Dickey study investigated integrating a cognitive apprenticeship model into an educational technology Web- based course for pre-service primary and secondary teacher education and described varying degrees of success. The Maher, et. al. study used the cognitive apprenticeship framework to explain the doctoral student’s skill development and found that it supported the cognitive component but not the apprenticeship component. The Dutch study explored the issues of how do teachers value elements of the cognitive apprenticeship model in designing and delivering competence- based prevocational secondary education and what individual action theories to teachers have regarding competence-based prevocationalsecondaryeducation. What are the implications for instructional design? The implications of cognitive apprenticeship for instructional design are to provide learners with more authentic situated problems where they will be able to transfer skills to use what they have learned in a variety of ways. It encompasses the use of dialogic environments to exchange information. It allows instructors to incorporate technology to provide online course materials and as a means to integrate technology into training. According to Michele Dickey, cognitive apprenticeship methods may be well suited for Web-based educational technology because the students have to use educational technology to learn about educational technology. The many online tools that can be used such as blogs, wikis, chat rooms, forums can create a community of practice that apprentices can use to connect with experts and other learners to not only share information but to also reflect and articulate their experiences. It provides audio and video tools to capture a master’s performance that can be incorporated into the training to provide more authentic experiences. Scenario CognitiveApprenticeship Appreciative Inquiry Charlotte Barner Until recently within the company, learners havebeen members of work teams that have moved through a traditional development process. In these teams, the members' focus has been on identifying problems and developing solutions, the leadership roles may or may not have been shared, members' authority and influence may have been limited, and members expected team leaders and project managers to give specific direction and make final decisions. Team building training provided by the company taught members what it meant to be a "good team player" and itemized problems to expect as the team developed from stage to stage. Similarly, team leaders were taught how to direct members, monitor and evaluate individual and team performance, and deal with problem behaviors. The traditional employee development curriculum does not reflect the new management style needed to cope with shifting priorities, matrixed responsibilities, and short production deadlines. A more flexible employee development methodology is being instituted, "Appreciative Inquiry." Current members of various corporate teams and are being groomed to hold the position of team leader or project manager in their respective departments as part of an initiative by the company to redefine these roles across the organization. They will be matched with mentors who will work with them in on- line environments and in face-to-face meetings to help them construct expert level knowledge of the Appreciative Inquiry process. Multimedia resources will be available for the learners to use to observe modeled examples of the approach. Learners will keep a journal of their attempts to apply the model to their work situations and will submit role-play videos for mentor critique. They will also participate in developmental team projects and engage in discussion forums andconversations. Learning Outcomes Learners will internalize the skills of experienced leaders and managers who can use
  6. 6. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Cognitive Apprenticeship the Appreciative Inquiry process to build and support successful productive teams. They will learnto: □ Understand and apply the Appreciative Inquiry's principles and processes as these relate to teamdevelopment □ Acquire the higher-level skills and abilities necessary for successful project management □ Hone competencies necessary to balance and communicate priorities, and to makedecisions □ Enrich their communication, facilitation, and negotiation abilities, especially when dealingwith diverse teams and divisiveissues □ Appreciate multiple points of view and be able to synthesize differences into a coherent and cohesive action plan □ Use Appreciative Inquiry to develop and guide cohesive and collaborative teams capable of sustaining high levels ofperformance.
  7. 7. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Cognitive Apprenticeship References Chan, P., Miller, R., Monroe, E. (2009). Cognitive apprenticeship as an instructional strategy for solving corporate training challenges.TechTrends,53(6),35-41.DOI10.1007/s11528-009-0341- Collins, A., Holum, A., Brown, J. S. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: making thinking visible. American Educator, reprinted with permission. Retrieved from http://elc.fhda.edu/transform/resources/collins_brown_holum_1991.pdf Dabbagh, N., & Bannan-Ritland, B. (2005) Online learning: Concepts, strategies, and application. Upper SaddleRiver, NJ: Prentice Hall. Dickey, M. (2007). Barriers and enablers in integrating cognitive apprenticeship methods in a Web-based educational technology course for K 12 (primary and secondary) teacher education, ALT-J, Research in Learning Technology, 15(2), 119 130. Jonassen, D.H. (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environment. New York, NY:Routledge. Maher, M. A., Gilmore, J. A., Feldon, D. F., Davis, T. E., (2013) Cognitive apprenticeship and the supervision of science and engineering research assistants. Journal of Research Practice, 9(2) Article M5. Retrieved from http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/354/311 Seezink, A., Poell, R.F., Kirschner, P.A. (2009). Teachers' individual action theories about competence- based education: The value of the cognitive apprenticeship model. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 61(2), 203-215.
  8. 8. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF Cognitive Apprenticeship What is it? In cognitive apprenticeships (CAs), novices learn from experts in authentic learning environments. As in traditional apprenticeships, experienced practitioners model how to handle real, complex tasks, then observe and coach the students as they attempt the tasks on their own. Eventually, the students become practitioners and mentors themselves. In cognitive apprenticeships, there is an additional focus on the internal mental processes involved in learning. Experts attempt to make these cognitive processes visible so apprentices can understand and use them. For example, reading teachers might think aloudas they read and analyze a literary passage. CAs also focus on generalizable skills and knowledge so that learning can be applied in various contexts. The cognitive apprenticeship instructional model is rooted in the constructivist theories of situated cognition and sociocultural learning. Situated cognition emphasizes that learning take place in authentic physical and social contexts, and encourages learning to be embedded in activity. This “situated” learning arguably leads to more efficient and effective transfer (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989). Sociocultural learning theory focuses on the importance of social interactions for passing on cultural tools and constructing knowledge. In Vygotsky's (1978) sociocultural theory, cognitive change occurs in the zone of proximal development when experts and novices work together on a task. Also related to CAs is Lave and Wenger’s (1991) concept of legitimate peripheral participation in a community of practice. They explain that newcomers who are not directly part of an activity still learn from their position in the outer limits of the community. How does it work? The cognitive apprenticeship framework focuses on four dimensions: content, method, sequencing, and sociology (Collins, 2006). The first, content, refers not only to the concepts, facts, and procedures that an expert knows (domain knowledge), but how the GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY LAURA MORGAN expert uses them to solve real-world problems (strategic knowledge). In a CA, apprentices learn both types of knowledge. The second dimension, method, refers to the six instructional strategies used in CAs: modeling, coaching, scaffolding, articulation, reflection, and exploration. Modeling requires the expert to both perform the task and make explicit the internal cognitive processes needed to complete the task so that the novice can create a conceptual model. The expert coaches the novice by observing the novice perform the task and offering hints, feedback, advice, and reminders. Scaffolding refers more specifically to the supports that the expert provides the novice, which are gradually removed as the novice learns in a process called fading. Articulation occurs when novices explain and clarify their understanding, reasoning, and problem-solving strategies in their own words. This could occur through group discussion or writing a blog post, for example. Reflection encourages novices to revisit their performance and compare it with expert performances, a set of established criteria, their peers, and/or their own mental models to identify where they could improve. Finally, in exploration, the novices are encouraged to create their own goals based on problems of special interest to them. The third dimension, sequencing, suggests that learning activities progress with increasing complexity, with increasing diversity, and from global to local skills. Lastly according to Collins, the dimension of sociology refers to the social characteristics of CA learning environments. CAs should be situated in an authentic context, involve a community of practice, support intrinsic motivation to perform, and foster cooperative problem solving. Who is doing it? The cognitive apprenticeship model has been used in many instructional settings. Many internship programs and academic research assistantships employ CAs to onboard novice practitioners. E D I T 7 3 0
  9. 9. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Cognitive Apprenticeship Education professors at Mercer University developed a CA model for supporting dissertation writing with activities like think-aloud literature analyses with students and scholars, writing tasks with feedback sessions, and writing workshops that incorporate scaffolding, coaching, and reflection (Swanson, West, Carr, & Augustine, 2015). Nursing education also uses the CA approach. The School of Care Sciences at the University of Glamorgan used CA to teach students clinical nursing skills by recording video of expert practitioners performing and explaining procedures, recording and coaching students as they practiced, encouraging articulation through think-aloud practice, and using videos and discussions to reflect on performance (Woolley & Jarvis, 2007). Large companies also employ the cognitive apprenticeship model. Google trains new software engineers using a complex and robust program that includes CA. Google provides new hires with a mentor, encourages them to seek out other role models to coach and advise them, scaffolds their learning with check-lists, forums, and tutorials, provides opportunities for feedback, articulation, and reflection during a series of performance management procedures, and provides multiple opportunities for exploration, including Tech Talks (community-organized sharing events that are recorded and posted) and career development projects. Google found that these practices reduced isolation, enhanced collegiality, and increased employee morale and job satisfaction (Johnson & Senges, 2009). How effective is it? Research generally supports the effectiveness of cognitive apprenticeships in learning (Dennen & Burner, 2008). Seel and Schenk (2003) used CA in a multimedia environment and the results indicated that effective design-type problem solving took place, although scaffolding was difficult to employ in the digital environment. Liu (2005) studied an online CA for preservice teachers and found it to lead to better performance and attitudes towards instructional planning than classroom-based learning. Hendricks (2001) compared CA to traditional instruction and found that CA learners performed better on post-tests, but this advantage did not appear in a transfer activity two weeks later. Teong (2003) found that young students using a CA-based program called WordMath outperformed the traditional learning group in word problem- solving skills. Bonnett et al. (2006) compared 20 mentor-apprentice pairings of research scientists and undergraduate biology students who used an online CA program. The findings indicated that mentoring relationships were more successful when they focused on discipline-related topics instead of relationship management issues. The example of cognitive apprenticeship at Google is another success story in learning and engagement in a community of practice. Most of the research on CAs focuses on higher education, teacher training, and K-12 education, leaving room for research in the government and private sectors. What are the implications for instructional design? Cognitive apprenticeships can be considered for a variety of learning problems. Some of the model’s strong points are its emphasis on enculturation and making explicit the knowledge of an experienced practitioner, which are useful for novices achieving performance mastery in a specific knowledge domain (Dabbagh & Bannan-Ritland, 2005). For example, an instructional designer might recommend a CA to a company with high turnover rate or expected large growth in human resources in order to maintain institutional memory. Companies might also benefit from cognitive apprenticeships for people transitioning to new roles or departments within the organization where there is a distinct work culture and set of expectations. CAs could also help learners to solve decision-making problems in complex environments. New teachers, for example, might benefit from mentoring relationships with more experienced teachers, especially in terms of classroom management, instructional planning, and communication with parents. Additionally, cognitive apprenticeships could fulfill learning needs for students that require added enculturation into a community of practice. For example, after-school mentoring programs for youth that are struggling in school could provide
  10. 10. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Cognitive Apprenticeship them with the types of metacognitive, motivational, and self- regulating skills required to succeed in class. Various technologies could be used to facilitate a cognitive apprenticeship. Experienced practitioners could be either audio or video recorded as they model a task so that novices can repeatedly go back and refer to the expert demonstration. Wikis, discussion boards, journals, blogs, and video blogs could support collaborative learning and student articulation and reflection. Email, synchronous video, and instant messaging could be leveraged for coaching. Links to related resources could provide scaffolding and encourage exploration. Scenario A large pharmaceutical company is transitioning to a more flexible employee development model called Appreciative Inquiry. Current members of various corporate teams are being groomed to hold the position of team leader or project manager in their respective departments as part of the initiative by the company to redefine these roles across the organization. They will be matched with mentors who will work with them in online environments and in face-to-face meetings to help them construct expert level knowledge of the Appreciative Inquiry process. Multimedia resources will be available for the learners to use to observe modeled examples of the approach. Learners will keep a journal of their attempts to apply the model to their work situations and will submit role-play videos for mentor critique. They will also participate in developmental team projects and engage in discussion forums and conversations. Learners will internalize the skills of experienced leaders and managers who can use the Appreciative Inquiry process to build and support successful productive teams. They will learn to:  Understand and apply the Appreciative Inquiry's principles and processes as these relate to team development  Acquire the higher-level skills and abilities necessary for successful project management  Hone competencies necessary to balance and communicate priorities, and to make decisions  Enrich their communication, facilitation, and negotiation abilities, especially when dealing with diverse teams and divisive issues  Appreciate multiple points of view and be able to synthesize differences into a coherent and cohesive action plan  Use Appreciative Inquiry to develop and guide cohesive and collaborative teams capable of sustaining high levels of performance. (Adapted from Dabbagh and Bannan-Ritland,2005)
  11. 11. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Cognitive Apprenticeship References Bonnett, C., Wildemuth, B. M., & Sonnenwald, D. H. (2006). Interactivity between protégés and scientists in an electronic mentoring program. Instructional Science, (34), 21-61. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32- 42. Collins, A. (2006). Cognitive apprenticeship. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learningsciences (pp. 47- 60). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Dabbagh, N., & Bannan-Ritland, B. (2005). Online learning: Concepts, strategies, and application. Upper Saddle River N.J.: Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall. Dennen, V. P., & Burner, K. J. (2008). The cognitive apprenticeship model in educational practice. In M. J. Spector, M.D. Merrill, M. J. J. G. Van, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 425- 439). Abingdon, NY: Springer. Hendricks, C. C. (2001). Teaching causal reasoning through cognitive apprenticeship: What are results from situated learning? Journal of Educational Research, 94(5), 302-311. Johnson, M. & Senges, M. (2009). Learning to be a programmer in a complex organization: A case study on practice-based learning during the onboarding process at Google. Journal of Workplace Learning, 22(3), 180-194. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Liu, T. C. (2005). Web-based cognitive apprenticeship model for improving pre-service teachers' performances and attitudes towards instructional planning: Design and field experiment. Educational Technology & Society, 8(2), 136-149. Seel, N. M., & Schenk, K. (2003). An evaluation report of multimedia environments as cognitive learning tools. Evaluation and Program Planning, 26(2), 215-224. Swanson, K. W., West, J., Carr, S., & Augustine, S. (2015). Supporting dissertation writing using a cognitive apprenticeship model. In V. C. X. Wang (Ed.), Handbook of research on scholarly publishing and research methods (pp. 84-104). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. Teong, S. K. (2003). The effect of metacognitive training on mathematical word-problem solving.Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(1), 46-55.
  12. 12. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF Cognitive Flexibility Hypertext What is it? Cognitive Flexibility Hypertext (CFH) is a constructivist learning environment that “stimulates creative and critical thinking by allowing users to look at the same problem-situations from multiple perspectives within a self-controlled, interactive environment” according to Spiro, Lima, Koehler, who helped to develop the model (2004, p. 375). The model originated from Cognitive Flexibility Theory (CFT), which was conceived by Rand Spiro, Coulson, Feltovich and Anderson in 1988, basing it on the following main tenets: 1) uses multiple case studies to insure that a variety of possible situations are presented, 2) focuses on cross-case differences in how concepts and principles are applied, and 3) gives consideration to multiple perspectivesas an aid to understand the connected nature of the domain concepts and promoting flexible knowledgebuilding. Cognitive flexibility theory focuses on the nature of learning in complex and ill-structured domains. Spiro & Jehng (1990, p. 165) state: "By cognitive flexibility, we mean the ability to spontaneously restructure one's knowledge, in many ways, in adaptive response to radically changing situationaldemands...This is a function of both the way knowledge is represented (e.g.,along multiple rather single conceptual dimensions) and the processes that operate on those mental representations (e.g., processes of schema assembly rather than intact schemaretrieval).” Hypertext is the medium for representing cognitive flexibility theory. Due to the non-linear learning approach in CFT, itmost often uses multimedia and interactive technology for learning. CFH is a unique pedagogical model which is best suited for extremely complex problems, such as dilemmas or highly subjective, contextualized cases that do not have a clear-cut or linear pathway to a solution, such as those in psychology and medicine. How does it work? CFHs are unique environments defined by the critical need for representing multiple perspectives, the emphasis on learner- directed study vs. instructor-led, and the rich, interconnected, specific resources present in the learning environment. It ismost often GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY ANNE CAMPBELL used as a supplemental tool as part of a course of instruction. Jonassen, Ambruso & Olesen (1992) describe an original application of cognitive flexibility theory to the design of a hypertext program on transfusion medicine. The program provides a number of different clinical cases which studentsmust diagnose and treat using various sources of informationavailable (including advice from experts). The learning environment presents multiple perspectives on the content, is complex andill- defined, and emphasizes the construction of knowledge by the learner. A key defining characteristic of CFH learning environments is that the learning activities provide multiple perspectives and representations of content as evident in the example above. Instruction by an instructor is limited, and the construction of knowledge is on the learner to create. “Hypertext” itself is a term coined by Theodor Nelson to describe a user-directed approach to organize and sequence text, versus the traditional reading approach which is author-directed (Jonassen, 2011, p. 212). This exemplifies the ownership in PSLEs, where “the onus is placedon the student to create a model to capture in meaningful ways the complexity presented in the learning task” (Dabbagh & Dass, 2013, p. 162). The instructor should also provide sources, or ensure the multimedia environment has such sources, with a high level of interconnection between the information sources to enable the learner to construct broader applications from the highly specific scenarios presented. The materials and hypertext sources should be very rich and detailed in nature and support context-dependent case knowledge. In essence, the hypertext environment needs to provide as much information or access to information to allowthe learner to consider as many vantage points to the problem as possible. Who is doing it? The original applications in CFHs have been in reading comprehension, history, biology and medicine. These are all very complex, contextually dependent domains with interrelated tasks and knowledge structures where CFT has proven to be an effective learning theory for mastery of complex knowledge transfer. Using hypertext as a medium for E D I T 7 3 0
  13. 13. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Cognitive Flexibility Hypertext CFT learning has become more prevalent in education to supplement courseworkon highly complexsubjects. Today most social media environments are essentially CFHs. Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest, and others are ill- structured, hypermedia environments which offer multiple perspectives, timely and realistic problem solving opportunities and links to contextualized, specific cases. While non- controversial topics are also discussed using social media platforms, these hypertext environments have become knownfor being the first place most people turn to in order to learn more about the toughest issues of today and offering their perspective on matters like racial injustice, local and global politics, among many others. Most interactive technologies are CFHs by design, such as interactive smartboards which are increasingly prevalent in classrooms all across the world. Interactive whiteboards support non-linear learning in two main ways, by accessing hypertext and multimedia external to the classroom, and by allowing for non- linear movement between the smartboard files related toquestions and answers of students (Blau,2011). How effective is it? CFHs are best for raising awareness and understanding the complexities of specific societal issues. Learners must take multiple perspectives on issues and construct their own opinions and approaches to finding a solution to the problem. As Dabbagh and Dass found in their 2013 study, “CFH case problems did not guide learners toward a specific external product or concrete solution; rather, CFH case problems evoked internal or tacit outcomes and changes in understandings that cannot be readily detected or measured, such as raising awareness and developing opinions on a specific societal issue, or understanding cultural differences and analyzing debates on alternative energy sources” (p. 172). The study also revealed that students spent on average one and a half times longer in a heterarchical (network-like) case problem design, such as a CFH, and this design also resulted in greater collaboration between users (Dabbagh & Dass, p. 162). For 21st century learning objectives, CFHs are ideal environments for instilling critical thinking and collaboration inlearners. In 2004, Godshalk, Harvey, and Moller studied the effectiveness of a complex problem like sexual harassment in the workplace. They found that learning tasks that required learners to explore several opinions and options were more effective in raising learners’ awareness and understanding of sexual harassment than learning tasks that required learners to explore the issueby taking a more defined and judgmental task” (Dabbagh & Dass, 2013, p. 163). In a 2013 study by Rinaldo, Laverie, Tapp, and Humphrey, Twitter was used as the CFH to enhance the classroom experience. The study found that students who engaged morewith Twitter throughout the semester realized a variety of benefits which included positive shifts in their motivations towards the course and task mastery, as well as shaping goals related to future careers (Rinaldo et al, 2013). What are the implications for instructional design? As CFT believes that the transfer of knowledge and skills beyond their initial learning situation is very important and that thenature effective learning in complex problems are highly context- dependent, the instructional designer must make it a priority to include information from multiple perspectives and use of many case studies that present diverse and specific examples. CFT also proposes at its core that learners must be able to construct their own representations of information and construct knowledge for themselves, and must be given opportunities to do so. “CFT suggests that learning is most successful when students are applying knowledges to new situations independently” (Rinaldo, Laverie, Tapp, Humphrey, 2013, p.19). Dabbagh and Dass found in their study of case problems that problem topics that were controversial, consequential, timely, realistic, and possessing multiple perspectives were found most often in CFHs (2013, p. 171). CFH case problem tasks were also found to be less tangible or overt than problem tasks conveyedin the case problems of the other models examined in theirstudy. However, with the advent of hypermedia and the internet, designers are finding that there is unexplored territory withvery few guidelines for the practice of using CFHs in the classroom. They have the technology and connections to the world at their fingertips, but being able to decipher credible sources and knowing how to link all of the information together is lessclear. New interactive technologies are expanding to personal devices connected by the Internet of Things, and should be utilized to provide greater detail and increase the number of perspectives
  14. 14. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Cognitive Flexibility Hypertext available to everyone to help tackle complex problems. Scenario Sophomores taking a political science class at American University are failing to understand all of the factors which affect an individual government’s decision-making process in an international crisis. The professor asks them to formulatean argument, either for, against, or undecided, on whether the United States should accept more Syrianrefugees. They will be given a constrained web environment which contains hyperlinks to web resources on the most currentstate of the crisis in Syria, current U.S. government programs and stances on refugees, statistics on immigrants to the U.S. inthe last ten years, popular opinions from highly regarded media outlets, historical cases of similar past crises with actions taken by the U.S., cultural differences between our two countries, surrounding countries’ Syrian refugee numbers, immigration programs and resources, and current statisticson U.S. unemployment rates and resources. The links andTwitter feed will show perspectives from government officials, everyday citizens, refugees and immigrants, and respected journalists. A Twitter feed showing Syrian- related threadswill also be embedded in the web environment. The students will discuss opinions on an online discussion forum with each other, and they will be able to talk with classmates and the professor in class as well. For the final project, they will present a two minute argument to the professor and class of their recommendation and detail the perspectives and information they used to make theirdecision.
  15. 15. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Cognitive Flexibility Hypertext References Antonenko, P. D., & Niederhauser, D. S. (2010). The influence of leads on cognitive load and learning ina hypertext environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2),140-150. Blau, I. (2011). [Chais] Teachers for "smart classrooms": The extent of implementation of an interactive whiteboard- based professional development program on elementary teachers' instructional practices. Interdisciplinary Journal of E- Learning and Learning Objects, 7(1), 275-289. Dabbagh, N., & Dass, S. (2013). Case problems for problem-based pedagogical approaches: Acomparative analysis. Computers & Education, 64, 161-174. Godshalk, V. M., Harvey, D. M., & Moller, L. (2004). The role of learning tasks on attitude changeusing cognitive flexibility hypertext systems. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(4),507-526. Jonassen, D., Ambruso, D . & Olesen, J. (1992). Designing hypertext on transfusion medicine using cognitive flexibility theory. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 1(3), 309-322. Jonassen, D. H. (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments.New York, NY:Routledge. Rinaldo, S. B., Laverie, D. A., Tapp, S., & Humphrey Jr, W. F. (2013). The benefits of social media in marketing education: Evaluating Twitter as a form of cognitive flexibility hypertext. Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, 21(1), 16. Spiro, R.J., Feltovich, P.J., Jacobson, M.J., & Coulson, R.L. (1992). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. In T.M. Duffy & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 57- 75). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Retrieved from:http://postgutenberg.typepad.com/files/spiro92.pdf
  16. 16. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF Cognitive Flexibility Hypertext What is it? Cognitive Flexibility Hypertext/Hypermedia isa web-based constructivist learningenvironment proposed by Spiro, Coulson, Feltovich, & Anderson in 1988. When researching biomedical cognition, Spiro and his fellow researchers discovered that medical school students frequently developed misconceptions because of the various forms of oversimplification used during their instruction. Spiro et al., proposed Cognitive Flexibility Theory (CFT) to facilitate complex knowledgeacquisition in ill-structured domains. Spiro & Jehng (1990) claimed hypertext to be the most appropriate medium for representing cognitive flexibility theory. CFT utilizes a real-world case to convey an advanced concept. The complexity of the concept is retained by integrating multiple mental and pedagogical representations (Spiro et al., 1988). Learners are able to flexibly accessrelated information through hypertexts. Instead of accepting an oversimplified, “pre- packaged” schema, learners must construct their own unique schemas. Cognitive Flexibility Hypertext/ Hypermedia (CFHs) were introduced in 1992 as a problem-solving learning environment to support the GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY BRENDA HUBER theory (Spiro, Feltovich, Jacobson, & Coulson, 1992). With a CFH learning environment, students encounter an authentic, complex case which features multiple perspectives and no clear solution. The juxtaposition of the perspectives creates themes for the learner to explore. The case, and the interconnected perspectives and themes are presented in documents, graphics, videos, audio files, photographs, etc.,and are accessible through hypertext links. Learners can enter the multidimensional CFH at any point and “crisscross” their way in a non-linear fashion through the information, examining it repeatedly, in different orders, for different purposes, and in different contexts (Jonassen, Dyer, Peters, Robinson, Harvey, King, & Loughner, 1996). To solve the problem, students must evaluate and synthesize all the perspectives. It requires cognitive flexibility for the learners to accommodate multiple perspectives as they construct their own interpretation of and solution to the problems (Jonassen,2011). How does it work? Learners enter a CFH through a web page that introduces a realistic case that lays thefoundation for the problem. The scenario is representative of something a professional would encounter in the workplace. It can be presented in any number of ways: as a video, business report, meeting dialog, etc. Learners sometimes find they are assigneda role to play and their task is outlined. They are free to click on any hyperlink to gather the background knowledge they need by exploring the different perspectives of the problem. Each perspective is a mini-case of the overarching case, as each represents a unique reality of the situation and contributes a different opinion, possible solution, or facts that must be taken into consideration. The perspectives are presented in the form of primary case material: interviews, emails, maps, letters, reports, etc. The more varied the mini- cases are, the more likely it is for learners to be able to transfer problem solving skills (Jonassen, et al., 1996). Underlying themes are based on the points made by different perspectives and learners must navigate through competing viewpoints. Hot words and phrases link the themes and perspectives, perspective to Scenario What do the Statue of Liberty, Devil’s Tower, and Cesar Chavez’s home all have in common? They are all United States’ National Monuments. President Obama recently named three other places of historical or geological significance to the list of 117 monuments around the U.S. There are several more under consideration. However, it is not an easy task to declare a site a national monument. It takes a Presidential proclamation or Congressional legislation for it to happen. There are conflicting opinions about the designation of land as a monument as itrestricts its use and future development. Cranberry Wilderness stretches over 48,000 acres in West Virginia and is home to both an important aquifer and valuable shale deposits. Should this federally-protected wilderness area join the list of National Monuments or should several proposed natural gas pipelines be allowed to cross its boundaries? Through a Cognitive Flexibility Hypermedia activity you can explore the debate about the financial, cultural, and environment impact on Cranberry Wilderness and decide whether you support or are opposed the proposed Birthplace of Rivers NationalMonument. E D I T 7 3 0
  17. 17. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Cognitive Flexibility Hypertext perspective, themes to themes, and back to the main case. The interconnectedness of the mini- case elements allows learners to recognize patterns and analogies that can be applied to new cases (Graddy, Lee, & Timmons, 2001). Users can navigate back and forth between the themes and perspectives and review the scenario at anytime. Some CFHs further engage learners by providing a place totake notes or providing access to search engines so learners can locate additional information and add their own hyperlinks to the system. The ultimate goal is for the learner to synthesize the information in the case to make a decision and be able to justify it. The final product may be a report, a design document, an essay, or other artifact that demonstratesboth knowledge acquisition and transfer of knowledge. Who is doing it? The original research that spawned both Cognitive Flexibility Theory andCognitive Flexibility Hypertext/Hypermedia was on medical school students. The need to convey the complex thinking of expert dental anesthesiologists to Korean dental students was accomplished with a CFH that was part of a cognitive apprenticeship program. It featured mini-cases in the form of video segments that featured expert performances and reasoning. Using the knowledge gained by examining the different variables in the mini-cases and the experts’ reasoning at critical junctures, the dental students were expected to model the reasoning process used by an expert and make decisions asa dental surgeon to improve the outcome in the test case (Choi, Hong, Park & Lee, 2013). Several colleges and universities have adopted CFH learning platforms to meet the advance learning needs of their students. Jonassen (2011) developed several CFH programs including one for a geography course and another for a sociology course. The would-be geographers were asked to take on the role of a member of a consulting firm that had been asked to design an alternate route for an intersection and later to choice the location of a newcommunity landfill. The perspective included soil maps, traffic and accident reports, and the opinions of citizens and public leaders. The sociology students were asked to solve three problems: 1) chose which renter to lease a house to; 2) decide which person to hire as a sales director; and 3) decide which person to admit to the final freshman slot. The perspectives included sociological theories, and applicants’ personal viewpoints. Toy & McShay (2003) created a CFH for pre-service teachers so they could identify and explore the many multicultural themes that are present in different school settings and the ways, as teachers, they could applytheir new knowledge in other educational contexts. How effective is it? CFHs have been found to be effective inavoiding the oversimplification in instruction andstudent misconceptions that can develop when attempting to present complex or ill-structured information in a linear format (Spiro et al., 1988). Because of the cognitive load they demand of learners, CFHs are not recommended for introductory learning situations (Spiro et al.,1992). Compared to students who participated in learning designs that emphasized mastery of declarative knowledge, students who used CFHs were superior in transferring their problem solving skills to new situations. However, the control group performed better on traditional recall assessments (Jacobson & Spiro, 1995). It should be noted that students do not always use the learning tool as designed without appropriate guidance (Choi, et al., 2013; and Strobel, Jonassen & Ionas, 2008). Because the system is designed to be used independently, some users may struggle to actively construct knowledge and make meaning of the themes and perspectives (Strobel, et al., 2008). What are the implications for instructional design? CFHs are powerful instructional models for understanding the complexities of ill-defined, real- life problems and making choices for medical diagnoses, public policy decisions, and legal and ethical conundrums. They support the development of flexible thinking that is required to analyze and synthesize multiple perspectives. Because the goal is for a learner to develop a unique schema through which to approach new problems or situations, a CFH would be inappropriate for group learning environments. CFH were designed as a computer- based learning model, and internet access and search engines increase the accessibility of materials to add details to perspectives. Word processing, computer
  18. 18. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Cognitive Flexibility Hypertext aided designsoftware, and other programs can be combined with a CFH to provide opportunities for learners to demonstrate their flexible decision making and itsramifications.
  19. 19. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Cognitive Flexibility Hypertext References Choi, I., Hong, Y., Park, H., & Lee, Y. (2013). Case-based learning for anesthesiology: Enhancing dynamicdecision making skills through cognitive apprenticeship and cognitive flexibility. In Luckin, R., Goodyear, P., Puntambeker, R., Grabowski, B., Understood, J., & Winters, N. (Eds.), Handbook of design in educational technology. (pp. 230-240). New York, NY: Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.safaribooksonline.com/library/view/handbook-of-design/9780415807340/xhtml/Ch023.xhtml Graddy, D.B., Lee, J.T., & Timmons, J.D., (2001). Cognitive flexibility hypertext as a learning environment in economics: A pedagogical note. Journal for Economic Educators 2001, 3(3). Electronic journal. Retrieved from http://capone.mtsu.edu/jee/PDF_Files/TEAcogpaper.pdf Jacobson, M. J., & Spiro, R. J. (1995). Hypertext learning environments, cognitive flexibility, and the transfer of complex knowledge: An empirical investigation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12(4):301- 333. Jonassen, D.H., Strobel, J., & Ionas, I.G. (2008). The evolution of a collaborative authoring system for non- linear hypertext: A design-based research study. Computers & Education: An International Journal, 5(1), 67-85. Jonassen, D.H., Dyer, D., Peters, K., Robinson, T., Harvey, D., King, M., & Loughner, P. (1996). Cognitive flexibility hypertexts on the web. In B. Khan (Ed.), Web-based instruction. (pp. 120-133). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational TechnologyPublications. Jonassen, D.H., (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments. New York, NY:Routledge. Spiro, R.J., Cousin, R.I., Feltovich, P.J., & Anderson, D.K. (1988). Cognitive flexibility theory: Advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Tech Report No. 441. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign, Center for the Study of Reading. Retrieved fromhttp://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED302821.pdf Spiro, R.J. & Jehng, J. (1990). Cognitive flexibility and hypertext: Theory and technology for the non-linear and multidimensional traversal of complex subject matter. D. Nix & R. Spiro (eds.), Cognition, education, and multimedia. (pp. 163-205). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Spiro, R.J., Feltovich, P.J., Jacobson, M.J., & Coulson, R.L. (1992). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. In T.M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. (pp. 57- 75). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Toy, S. & McShay, J. (2003). Using Cognitive Flexible hypertext environments to provide virtual field experiences for preservice teachers in a multicultural course. In C. Crawford, N. Davis, J. Price, R. Weber & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2003. (pp. 2427-2430). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education. Retrieved fromhttp://www.editlib.org/p/18465
  20. 20. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF Communities of Practice What is it? A community of practice (COP) is an age-old learning model, which was defined by Etienne Wenger and Jean Lave in the early 1990s. They identified COPs as a unique model in the process of studying apprenticeships and knowledge sharing within a research project run at the Institute for Research on Learning (IRL) (Corso, n.d.). They discovered that there need not be only two people involved in an apprenticeship: a novice and an expert. Rather, a community can serve as a “living curriculum” for novices and experts at various levels (Wenger, 2006). As it was researched further, Wenger and Lave discovered this model virtually everywhere, often without a formal apprenticeship structure and without the dichotomy between novice and expert. They identified three distinct characteristics of COPS: (1) domain, (2) community, and (3) practice. A COP is when practitioners of a certain domain come together on a regular and on-going basis to discuss and share strategies, resources, and best practices. As an off- shoot of apprenticeships, this learning model is authentic and largely dependent on participants that directand construct their own learning. It is for this reason that it falls under constructivist epistemology, although it also has implications for connectivism in the modern age. In essence, Wenger and Lave did not invent a new learningmodel. Rather, they discovered and defined anaturally-occurring model used everywhere. How does it work? COPs do not lend themselves to traditional roles of “instructor” and “student.” Rather, all practitioners come to the table with their unique levels of expertise. There may be core members who actively and frequently participate and peripheral members who come and go or eventually become core members. Although COPs can be “cultivated,” the members are responsible for sustaining it over time (Cambridge, Kaplan, & Suter, 2005). The community ranges from various levels of “connectivity” and “institutionalization” (Jonassen, 1999). For example, GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY NASHRAH AHMED nurses that meet for lunch daily to discuss issues is an example of low institutionalization and high connectivity. On the other hand, a national association of nurses that has annual gatherings is an example of high institutionalization and low connectivity. The types of domain, community, and practice vary drastically. Learning happens through social interaction and situated learning. It is authentic in that practitionersdrive the learning and discuss topics that are most relevant totheir practice and that will enhance learning in that domain. Knowledge- sharing is also an essential component. In fact, “theory and evidence suggest that knowledge creation and sharing are processes that involve often spontaneouslyformed groups of individuals” (Corso, n.d.). Finally, COPs are considered living, breathing entities that evolve over time. There are five loose stages of evolution: potential, coalescing, maturing, stewardship and transformation. In a nutshell, a “loose network” of individuals eventually coalesce into a community, mature over time, and become stewards of knowledge in a particular area (Corso, n.d.). Even with institutionalization and orchestration, these stages can only come into existence through socialinteractions that are authentic andspontaneous. Who is doing it? Communities of practice have always existed and continue to exist in every aspect of life, from local knitting clubs to international associations of law or medicine. Since its introduction by Lave and Wenger, it has been used heavilyin business and management settings. Wenger argues that an organization’s most valuable resource is people and “[e]ven when people work for large organizations, they learn through their participation in more specific communities made up of people with whom they interact on a regular basis” (1998). COPs are also used in government, non-profit organizations, and associations. One example is the World Bank’s knowledge management strategy, which incorporates an increasing number of COPs (Wenger, 1999). COPs alsooccur informally within organizations across functional units. For example, the group of colleagues one interacts with on a regular basis to share experiences and discuss ideas E D I T 7 3 0
  21. 21. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Communities of Practice would be considered an informal COP. Although it is not generally used in K-12 education for students, teachers often work within COPs centered on planning and instruction. In today’s increasingly globalized world, online platforms have further expanded COPs beyond geographic boundaries. Many COPs contain both online and face-to-face components. For example, teachers may meet weekly in person and also use a Google Drive to share resources discussed. There are professional circles that mostly interact online but may have an occasional live webinardiscussion. How effective is it? The effectiveness and impact of communities of practice is difficult to measure because its “primary ‘output’ –knowledge is intangible” (Wenger, 1999). However, there are certain indicators of an effective COP such as “knowledge assimilation, creation, transfer, sharing, capitalization, and reuse” (Corso, n.d.). A successful COP connects people, “capture[s] and diffuses existing knowledge,” and generates new knowledge (Cambridge, Kaplan, & Suter, 2005). Snyder and Wenger outlines ways in which COPs have added valueto various businesses and organization such as the World Bank, Buckman Labs, and Chrysler. In particular, they have helped organizations develop hubs of strategic knowledge and create new lines of business by fostering the exchange of entrepreneurial insight. COPs have also streamlined problem- solving processes by connecting practitioners to experts in their fields. They have also aided in the transfer of knowledge as participants exchange context-specific bestpractices. Although COPs have been around for centuries and are increasingly gaining momentum in organizational environments, there are a number of challenges or unresolved issues that may impede the development of effective COPs in today’s fast-paced globalized workforce. Kerno identifies three limitations or challenges: (1) time constraints that don’t allow participants to “engage in prolonged, sustained discourse,” (2) the hierarchical structure of organizations that has the potential to be at odds with the fluid, horizontalnature of COPs, and (3) the role of varying cultures, some of which may emphasize individualismovercommunity. What are the implications for instructional design? Communities of practice are a naturally occurring model in organizations and in everyday life. They can be a valuable structure for instruction and their “organic, spontaneous, and informal nature” do not warrant a great deal of “supervision and interference” (Wenger, 1999). In this regard, it is ideal for cases when resources to provide formal learning interventions are limited and there is a great deal of collective expertise ona topic. It is also ideal for continuing education for adults because it is embedded in a shared real-world practice or area of expertise. COPs focus on the distribution, transfer, and generation of knowledge through collaboration, resource- sharing, and dialogue. However, “managers cannot mandate communities or practice; they [must] bring the right people together, provide an infrastructure in which communities can thrive, and measure the communities’ value in nontraditional ways” (Wenger, 1999). Instructors or managers ultimately serve as facilitators on an on-going basis and they are cognizant of the phases or life cycle of COPs: inquire,design, launch, grow, and sustain (Cambridge, Kaplan, & Suter, 2005). Technology has greatly enhanced the scope and functionality of COPs. The “technical architecture” is as important as the “social architecture.” In fact, many COPs exist entirely online on social media platforms, interactive websites, or discussion boards. Online resource-sharing platforms such as Google Drive are used to share resources and collectively work on projects. Social media groups on Pinterest or Facebook can also be used as resource-sharing and collaboration tools respectively. For COPs that are virtual or cannot meet face-to- face on a regular basis, Skype, Adobe Connect, WebEx, or any similar web conferencing tool provides a “sense ofplace”.
  22. 22. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Communities of Practice Scenario ABC is a two-year alternative teacher preparation and leadership development program that places highly qualified young college graduates in high- needs schools. Teachers in their second year, 60 in total, have traditionally received less support and professional development than first-year teachers. Unlike first-year teachers who are focused on mastering the foundations of instruction and pedagogy, second-year teachers are refining skills and preparing to become future leaders in the movement for education equity, whether they stay in the classroom or pursue related careers. They have expressed a need for more differentiated support because the information that is useful for first-year teachers does not feel relevant to them. Additionally, they have different interests based on the career trajectory they have decided to pursue after finishing the program. For example, some are interested in school leadership, some are interested in curriculum design, and others are interested in leveraging community relationships. ABC does not have the resources and capacity to provide robust differentiated support. However, they realized that second-year teachers have benefited from interacting with each other as well as the large alumni base in the region. Many of the second- year and alumni teachers are finding effective and innovative ways to design instruction, connect with communities, and take on leadership roles in their schools. ABC would like to leverage this collective expertise to provide more authentic and differentiated support to second- yearteachers.
  23. 23. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Communities of Practice References Cambridge, D., Kaplan, S., & Suter, V. (2005). Community of practice design guide: A step-by-step guide for designing & cultivating communities of practice in higher education (pdf file). Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/nli0531.pdf. Corso, M., & Giacobbe, A. (n.d.). Building communities of practice that work: A case study based research [pdf file]. Retrieved from http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/wbs/conf/olkc/archive/oklc6/papers/corsogiacobbe.pdf Jonassen, D., & Land, S. (2012). Preface. Theoretical foundations of learning environments (p. vii-x). New York, NY: Routledge. Retrieved from http://samples.sainsburysebooks.co.uk/9781136702600_sample_844583.pdf Kerno, S.J. (2008). Limitations of communities of practice: A consideration of unresolved issues and difficulties in the approach. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15(1) 69-78. Retrieved from http://www.knowledgemobilization.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/8.-Limitations-of- Communities-of-Practice-.pdf. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning as a social system. The Systems Thinker, 9(5). Wenger, E., & Snyder, W. (1999). Communities of practice: The organizational frontier. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from http://www.rareplanet.org/sites/rareplanet.org/files/Communities_of_Practice_The _Organizational_Frontier%5B1%5D.pdf. Wenger, E. (2006). Communities of practice: A brief introduction (pdf file). Retrieved from http://wenger- trayner.com/wp- content/uploads/2013/10/06-Brief-introduction-to-communities-of-practice.pdf.
  24. 24. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF Communities of Practice What is it? A community of practice is a group of people who share a common concern, a set of problems, or interest in a topicand who come together to fulfill both individual and group goals (Wenger et al., 1998). Participating in these ‘communities of practice’ is essential to our learning (Wenger,2000b). Online collaborative forums offer just-in-time training solutions and are often represented in the form of discussion boards, collaborative software programs, and centers for feedback. These forums have consequentially evolved into CoPs wherein interested stakeholders can interactively problem solve, create new knowledge, or troubleshoot any issues facing field practitioners (Wenger,1998). Wenger pointed out that CoPs can also be considered as apart of broader conceptual framework for thinking about learning in its social dimensions. CoPs are theoretically grounded in social constructivism. While as pedagogical model, it is consistent with the epistemological assumptions of constructivism, which stipulate that meaning is a function of how the individual creates meaning from his or her experiences and actions (Jonassen,1991). How does it work? CoPs often focus on sharing best practices and creating new knowledge to advance a domain of professional practice. Arising out of learning, Wenger considered that CoPs exhibits many characteristic of systems more generally: emergent of learning, complex relationships, self-organization, dynamic boundaries, ongoing negotiation identity and culturalmeaning. When designing itself, a community should look at the following elements: events, leadership, connectivity, membership, projects, and artifacts (Wenger,2000b). Following are the instructional characteristics ofCoPs: □ Control of learning is distributed amongthe participants in the community and is not in the hands ofa single instructor or expert. □ Participants are committed to the generationand GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY CHUNHUA XIONG sharing of newknowledge. □ Learning activities are flexible andnegotiated. □ The participants exhibit high levels of dialogue, interaction, collaboration, and socialnegotiation. □ A shared goal, problem, or project bindsthe participants and provides a common focus and an incentiveto work together as acommunity. □ Diversity, multiple perspectives, and epistemic issues are appreciated. □ Traditional disciplinary and conceptual boundariesare crossed. □ Innovation and creativity are encouragedand supported. Who is doing it? Many studies show that CoPs have existed in a very wide range of domains in academe, business, government, education, health and the civil sector. Following are a few examples of the applications of CoPs: First of all, CoPs have been applied widely in companies or organizations. For example, when a company reorganized into a team-based structure, employees with functional expertise may create communities of practice as a way of maintaining connections with peers. Elsewhere, people may form communities in response to changes originating outside or inside the organization, such as the rise of e-commerce, computer makers offering consulting service,etc. Moreover, in order to develop a knowledge sharing culture, a case study explores how NASA's Office of theChief Engineer established communities of practice on the NASA Engineering Network, from establishing simple websites that compiled discipline- specific resources to fostering a knowledge-sharing environment through collaborative and interactive technologies (Topousis et al.,2012). Last but not least, Polin’s (2008) study illustrates ways in which social computing applications enable the use of aCoP model in graduate professional education, which offers a perspective on graduate professional education as anactivity arising in a community of professionalpractice. E D I T 7 3 0
  25. 25. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Communities of Practice How effective is it? Combined with Wenger’s view of the application of the CoPs, the effectiveness can be discussed from following aspects: To begin with, in organization in the private and public sectors, CoPs have provided a vehicle for peer- to-peer learning among practitioners. CoPs have been seen toimprove organizational performance at companies as diverse as international bank, a major car manufacturer, and the U.S. government agency. (Wenger & Synder,2000b) Secondly, in education, CoPs are increasingly used for professional development, but they also offer a fresh perspective on learning and education more generally. New thinking about the role of educational institutions anddesign of learning opportunities is arising by applying the CoPs in educational field. Finally, in international development, cultivating horizontal communities of practice among local practitioners presents an attractive alternative to the traditional view of vertical transmission of knowledge (Wenger, 2009). Actually, NASA’s CoPs showed that the collaborative exchanges in CoPs “have already offered significant discoveries in how to reduce risk in space exploration and optimize engineering designs.” (Topousis et al., 2012). What are the implications for instructional design? Today, organizations, workgroups, teams, and individuals must work together in new ways. Inter- organizational collaboration is increasingly important (Cambridge et al., 2005). Studies indicated that CoPs can be cultivated to address the needs of sharing information, exchange of opinions, and peer-to-peer learning in a varietyof contexts through appropriate technologies, in particular the rise of social media. By applying CoPs as a pedagogical approach, members of community attempt to unveil tacitskills and abilities that often only evolve from experience (Hildreth et al., 2000; Wenger, 2000a; Wenger,2000b). In order to develop quality CoPs, Harvey et al mention that the organizational model, culture, and context must be considered (Harvey et al., 2012). While successfully facilitating a CoP involves understanding its lifecycle phase (inquire, design, prototype, launch, grow, and sustain) and ensuring that the expectations, plans, communications, collaborative activities, technologies, and measures ofsuccess map to the current phase of the community’s. The technical architecture of the community supports it in providing a platform for communication and collaboration, while the social architecture enlivens it. Therefore, the roles, processes, and approaches that engage people—whether face- to-face or online—are essential in relationship building, collaborative learning, knowledge sharing, and action (Cambridge et al., 2005). Scenario “Engaging in Cultural Inquiry” (by Kristin Percy-Calaff) Introduction A national professional teaching society estimates thatmore than half the public schools in America are wrestling with cultural diversity issues and learning needs stemming from differences in students’ educational and ethnicbackgrounds. Some diversity issues come from the fact that the families of many school-aged children emigrated from foreign countries and do not speak English. Other issues arise because American families are more mobile than they were 25 years ago. Many students spend only 1 or 2 years in the same school system. When they arrive at a new school, they havediffering academic backgrounds and expectations. Teachers need to be able to analyze student problemsand identify whether they are developmental issues, cultural differences, or learning disabilities. Perhaps the “difficulties” are the result of the teacher’s overlynarrow expectations. Educators must be able to locate resources and use these resources to flexibly solve problems that interfere withtheir students’learning. This year’s public school educational conference will address this issue; the theme is “Cultural Inquiry and Effective Education (CIEE).” Continued on next page…
  26. 26. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Communities of Practice The goal of the CIEE conference is “to support teachers working in culturally diverse classrooms so that they might provide effective educational opportunities for all students.” The conference will be divided into tracks geared to four audiences: teachers in K–7, teachers in 8–12, school administrators, and technology support professionals.Presenters and participants will be encouraged to collaborate and share their experiences, and to recommend resources and methods for supporting culturally diverse classrooms. As the conference organizer, you want this event to lay the groundwork for a teacher support base for culturalissues. Learning Outcomes The task force will be charged with designing an environment that will enable teachers to do the following:  Identify appropriate cultural approaches,knowledge domains, and intervention strategies used in different educationalsituations  Develop a research plan and identify relevant resources, including other teachers, to solve a culturally based educationalproblem  Decide how and when resources should be used to support decisions, methods, and information given ina situation  Envision alternative ways of viewingeducational processes  Provide experiential guidance to instructors whoare unfamiliar with the cultures of the studentsthey are encountering  Identify strategies to improve educational practice  Reflect on strategy outcomes and refinetheir solutions for future practice.
  27. 27. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Communities of Practice References Cambridge. D., Kaplan. S., & Suter, V. (2005). Community of practice design guide: A step-by-step guide for designing &cultivating communities of practice in higher education. Retrieved from EDUCAUSE website: http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/NLI0531.pdf Harvey, J. F., Cohendet, P., Simon, L., & Dubois, L. E. (2013). Another cog in the machine: Designing communities of practice in professional bureaucracies. European Management Journal, 31, 27–40. Hildreth, P., Kimble, C., & Wright, P. (2000). Communities of practice in the distributed international environment. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(1), 27–38. Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3),5–14. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge England: Cambridge UniversityPress. Polin, G. L. (2008) Graduate professional education from a community of practice perspective: The role of social and technical networking. In C. Blackmore (Eds.), Social learning systems and communities of practice (pp. 163-177). London: Springer. Topousis, D., Dennehy, C.J., & Lebsock, K.L. (2012). NASA’s experiences enabling the capture and sharing of technical expertise through communities of practice. Acta Astronautica, 81(2),499– 511. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, London: Cambridge UniversityPress. Wenger, E. C., & Snyder, W. M. (2000a). Communities of Practice: The organizational frontier. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 139-145. Wenger, E. (2000b). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7(2), 225 –246.
  28. 28. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF Goal-Based Scenarios What is it? Goal-based scenarios (GBS) are, first and foremost, a pedagogical model grounded in constructivism. According to Anne K. Bednar, constructivism is a theory that associates learning with creating meaning from experience (Ertmer & Newby, 1993). Building on this concept, GBS provideslearners with meaningful and authentic goals in the context of a real- world scenario. Originally proposed by Roger Schank, GBS accounts for the idea that too often, natural learning goals are overshadowed by artificial ones (Schank, 1992). They create a more authentic learning experience by providing learners with specific goals to work towards in solving aproblem. Additionally, goal-based scenarios allow for learning to occur throughout the scenario on a variety of different subjects; not just directly related to the specific goal. Learners are forced to build a skillset as they progress through the scenario, and make choices utilizing their newly acquired skills. As Schank notes, GBS is truly learning by doing and learning in real life, which tends to be a very effective way that people learn naturally.This also allows learners to take control of their own learning experience, since they are the ones that need to pursue the achievement of the goals (Abelson et al.,1994). How does it work? Goal-based scenarios typically have seven very well structured and well defined instructional characteristics. First are learning goals, which defines what students should learn from the GBS. Often, learning goals can be broken up into both process and content knowledge. Process knowledge describes how to practice skills that contribute to learner success, and content knowledge describes the information that learner success requires, respectively. The second instructional characteristic is a mission, which is the actual goal that will motivate the learner to solve the problem. Ideally, the mission is something relatable to the learner, but also realistic. Third is a cover story, which provides the background and context for the scenario thatcreates the need for the mission to be successfully GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY DAN JACKSON accomplished. This is a critical step, since a good cover story can be key in allowing the learner to become immersed in thescenario. The fourth instructional characteristic of a GBS is a role, which defines the character the learner is participating as during the scenario. Fifth is the scenario operations, which lay out all of the tasks the learner needs to complete in working towards the mission goal. The sixth characteristic is resources, which provide learners with additional information they needto accomplish their mission goal. Lastly, the seventh instructional characteristic is feedback, which is given to the learner in anyof three following ways as they complete the scenario. First, they can receive feedback as a direct consequence of an action they’ve taken or a decision they’ve made. Second, a coach or instructor can deliver feedback to the learner. Finally, feedback can be delivered in the form of relevant stories with similar experiences and learning outcomes (Reigeluth,1999). Within a GBS, the roles of the instructor and the learner arewell defined. The primary job of the instructor is to design the scenario, and then to explain it to the learners. One critical aspect for the instructor when explaining the scenario is that in order for the learner to be successful, they need to make sure to motivate them. The more engaged the learner is, the more successful they are at achieving the goal. The role of the learner, on the other hand, is to drive their own learning by doing. The learner needs to explore options and test solutions, acquiring new skills along the way to achieving thegoal. Who is doing it? Goal-based scenarios can be used in a multitude of educational settings, including both academia and business. One such example from academia describes Bill Purves, a Professor of Biology at Harvey Mudd College. Roger Schank encouraged Professor Purves to take a look at the skills a professional biologist needed to be successful, and then to create a GBS supporting the cultivation of those skills. Together, they created a scenario in which the student needed to develop a way to make bacteria produce insulin which would be then administered to a diabetic patient E D I T 7 3 0
  29. 29. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Goal-Based Scenarios (Schank,1992). Another example of a GBS is from the National Museum of Wildlife Art. In this example, learners write original stories using museum art as illustrations and inspiration for theirstories. While they use these pieces as part of the story, they are responsible for creating their own interpretations. They are also given a specific role from which the narrative is written, which allows them to learn about the artwork from the context of that particular role. The goal of this scenario is to learn more about the artwork and to understand it in context (Schaller et al., 2001). While these examples are vastly different, such is the scopeof use cases for goal-basedscenarios. How effective is it? Just like any training course, the effectiveness ofgoal- based scenarios often depends on the situation in which it is being used. However, when correctly employed, educational technology studies have shown that learning is often considerably enhanced in such real-worldenvironments. Additionally, this research supports the concept thatrole- playing in such real-world environments encourages learners to practice and internalize skills that they can eventually transfer into everyday situations (Kaufman & Sauvé, 2010). It is important to note that while the research supports GBS asa successful and effective training solution, there are a number of factors that can influence its effectiveness. First and foremost, as mentioned previously, it is critical for the instructor to not only explain the scenario, but also motivate and engage the learners. If the learners are not fully immersed in the scenario and in achieving the goal, the GBS’s effectiveness diminishes considerably. Another factor that can influence effectiveness is the scenario itself. If the scenario is not grounded in reality and authentic context, it will most likely not resonate with learners. Thus, learners will not be engaged or motivated to achieve the goal. One additional factor that can possibly influence effectiveness is the level of involvement from theinstructor. The learning in a goal-based scenario needs to be primarily learner-driven. If the instructor is too heavily involved in hand- holding the learners, it is easy for the learners to become disengaged and unmotivated. The intrinsic motivation of the learners driving themselves towards a solution cannot be forgotten, and this can significantly impact the effectiveness ofa goal-based scenario. What are the implications for instructional design? With the advancements in technology over the last several decades, the field of instructional design has benefited greatly. While traditional brick and mortar classroom settings can never be eliminated, technology has allowed instructional designers to create unbelievably immersive learning solutions across every imaginable industry. Goal-based scenarios lend themselves perfectly to a technology- supported solution, primarily because the learning is almost entirelylearner-driven. Technology can allow the learner to take on multiple roles and make decisions easily and seamlessly, without being confined to a classroom. This encourages learning to take place anywhere and everywhere, which opens up a whole new world of possibilities for real-world and authentic learning. Scenario Many organizations are currently very concerned about cyber security, and multi-family housing real estate investment trusts (REITs) are no different. Hackers know that REITs have a digital treasure trove of resident and employee information (e.g. credit card numbers, social security numbers, tax information, etc.) stored on their networks. In response to the imminent data threat, the IT department in one particular national REIT sent out a number of fake phishing emails trying to gauge the organization’s susceptibility to a cyber-attack, and the results were appalling. Employees willingly shared their intimate personal information (e.g. social security numbers, computer passwords, etc.); information which a hacker could use to cause major damage both for the individual and for the organization. As a result, it became evident that a significant training effort was necessary. A goal-based scenario computer based training course was Continued on next page…
  30. 30. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Goal-Based Scenarios chosen as the most effective way to reach the employeesand emphasize the importance of datasecurity. The scenario requires employees to perform a number of tasks and make choices based on problems that arise in order to protect the organization from a series of damaging cyber- attacks. These problems range anywhere from locking their computer when they leave to go to lunch, to adjusting privacy settings on their social media pages. The scenario is designed for employees to complete it individually, since it is each employee’s responsibility to keep themselves andorganization secure. As they progress through the scenario, they receive real-time feedback on their choices. They are not able to move forward in the scenario without completing a task and proving that they understand the concept being discussed at that point intime. By the time the employee completes the course, they should be well versed in the different methods hackers can use to access information, as well as how to prevent such attacks. They are of course assessed along the way during the scenario, but there is an additional layer of assessment following completion of the course. The IT department again sends out fake phishing emails to the organization at random intervals in the months following course completion. This gives them the ability to evaluate the effectiveness of the cyber security goal-based scenario in teaching employees to maintain a high level ofdata security, even after training hasconcluded.
  31. 31. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Goal-Based Scenarios References Abelson, R. P., Schank, R. C., & Langer, E. J. (1994). Beliefs, reasoning, and decision making: Psycho-logic in honor of Bob Abelson. Hillsdale, N.J: L.Erlbaum. Ertmer, P., & Newby, T. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 1(2), 43-71. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1002piq.21143 Kaufman, D., & Sauvé, L. (2010). Educational gameplay and simulation environments: Case studies and lessons learned. Hershey, PA: Information ScienceReference. Reigeluth, C.M. (1983). Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates. Schaller, D. T., Allison-Bunnell, S., & Nagel, S. (2001). Developing goal-based scenarios for web education. Retrieved from http://www.eduweb.com/goalbasedscenarios.html Schank, R. C. (1992). Goal-based scenarios. Technical Report #36. Evanston, IL: The Institute for the Learning Sciences, Northwestern University. Retrieved fromhttp://cogprints.org/624/1/V11ANSEK.html
  32. 32. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF Goal-Based Scenarios What is it? Roger Schank (1994) observed that young children are natural learners, but all their learning is associated with a goal. Children want to go places, therefore they learn to walk, and they tolerate much failure in the process. They want to communicate, so they learn to talk, and they keep refining this skill over many years. This kind of personal goal has much more motivating power than learning a seemingly random assortment of skills to earn a grade. Shank proposed a pedagogical model where scenarios are constructed around meaningful, authentic goals, and these goals would require the target skills to be learned as a necessary step. He called this model Goal-Based Scenarios. These scenarios feature learners as active participants in constructing both their knowledge and the methods by which the goal is achieved. Schank proposes that Goal-Based Scenarios is a pedagogy that can “provide motivation, a sense of accomplishment, a support system, and a focus on skills rather than facts.” This constructivist model builds on the concept of Situated Learning (Lave & Wenger, 1991) in that learning objectives are situated in the context in which they are used in the “real world.” However, Goal-Based Scenarios is distinct from situated learning in the presence of the titular goal; there is an overt objective that is driving the learning, which may be absent in a situated learning environment. How does it work? A Goal-Based Scenario consists of four components: Mission, Mission Focus, Cover Story, and Scenario Operations (Schank et al, 1994). The mission is the goal the learner is trying to accomplish, and it should be broad enough to entice a number of different activities. Most critically, it should be relevant and meaningful to the learner; no one mission will be meaningful to everyone. The mission focus describes the kinds of activities that the learner will need to undertake in order to complete the goal. The four kinds of mission focus are explanation, control, design, and GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY KATELYN SCHREYER discovery. The cover story is the scenario that is built up around the goal, to explain why the learner is pursuing the goal and define its context. For example, the cover story may include the background of a town with a polluted water supply, and it will also establish the learner as taking on the role of an expert consultant to solve the problem. The scenario operations are the actual activities that the students will undertake in the process of achieving the goal. In a Goal-Based Scenario, the instructor designs and explains the goal, with special care to create a goal that learners will engage with and become motivated to solve. A Goal-Based Scenario should have many viable solutions, which the learners will spend time exploring, and the skills that the instructor intends to teach should be aligned to the goal such that students will simply have to learn that skill, among others, on the way to completing the goal. The instructor must be sensitive to the interests of the learners, and design each Goal- Based Scenario to appeal to them, with the knowledge that no one scenario will be of interest to all students. Who is doing it? Goal-Based Scenarios can be used effectively in a wide variety of formal and informal educational settings and all educational levels, ranging from K-12 to workplace training and professional development to informal learning environments such as museums. With some imagination in designing the scenario, the model can be used to almost any skill. To provide some examples, the model has been used to teach financial accounting practices to MBA students by placing them in the role of a bank manager evaluating lending deals (Foster, 1995), and to teach about Sickle Cell Anemia and about health- care counseling to museum visitors of all ages (Bell, et al., 1994). It has been used to teach a government- mandated ethics program to high school students in Japan (Umeda, et al., 2012), and to teach undergraduates in a computer science program how to select computer equipment and components based on user requirements (Beriswell, 2014). It has also been E D I T 7 3 0
  33. 33. CLE PEDAGOGY BRIEF NOVEMBER 2015 Goal-Based Scenarios used in a computer-based environment to teach about the Central Limit Theorem to students in a statistics class (Hsu & Moore, 2010). How effective is it? Goal-Based Scenario are, when correctly implemented, a highly engaging and effective instructional approach. Zumbach & Reimann (1999) conducted a study comparing a computer based GBS, a computer-based rote drill program, and a hypertext environment covering the same material. Students grasp of basic facts was best in the drill program, but Schank (1994) argues that memorization of facts isn’t as significant a learning outcome as mastery of skills. Along those lines, this study showed that participants in the Goal- Based Scenario group had better structural knowledge of the target activity than the other two groups, and the Goal-Based Scenario group showed better argumentation in their discussion of the activity later. Most interestingly, both the drill and hypertext group showed a distinct drop in intrinsic motivation that did not manifest in the Goal-Based Scenario group. Furthermore, Goal-Based Scenarios have been shown to be effective for all students, regardless of ethnicity, gender,orprior coursework(Schoenfeld-Tacher,Jones, & Persichitte, 2001), so this use pedagogical model is an opportunity to minimize the achievement gap. Research has also shown when GBS’s are designed with Cognitive Load Theory in mind, motivational and academic outcomes are further improved (Kilic & Yildirim,2012). What are the implications for instructional design? Goal-Based Scenarios are ideal for teaching skills, and are less suited to teaching a corpus of facts for memorization. Furthermore, because the model centers on learning by doing, the target skill must be one that students can reasonably do, or that can be adequately reproduced in a simulator. For example, Goal-Based Scenarios are a poor choice for the skill of learning how to operate a nuclear reactor, as the cost of failure is extraordinary. Likewise, the skills of avionics and navigation for an aircraft would only fit into the Goal- Based Scenarios model with the extensive use of simulators prior to or entirely in place of flying an actual aircraft. Multiple learning technologies can benefit from this model. Most notably, almost all video games are goal- based scenarios, although they are not all educational in nature. This indicates that to develop an effective educational video game, the designer should keep the design criteria of Goal-Based Scenarios in mind. Simulations can also benefit from incorporating Goal- Based Scenarios to ensure that the learners can contextualize the skills the simulation is designed to teach. Goal-Based Scenarios are particularly helpful to teach skills that learners would have trouble contextualizing or appreciating the utility of if the skills were learned in a rote fashion. The motivating aspect of these scenarios can be useful for teaching skills that are in and of themselves “boring,” especially when removed from an authentic context, such as arithmetic. Scenario Ms. Jones is a computer science teacher at a high school, and she is teaching a unit on internet skills. She wishes to her students to learn how to use HTML, CSS, FTP, and how these basic building blocks of the internet work. Notably, her focus is that students learn to use these tools in an authentic and meaningful way, not that they memorize facts about them. She designs a Goal Based Scenario where the students will act as designers and producers of their own websites. The mission is for the student to create a website on a topic of their choice. The mission focus is on the design of a website. The cover story that she constructs for her students is that they are website developers creating a site to disseminate information about a given topic, with example topics given as a popular video game, book, or TV show. The scenario operations inherent in this scenario are: encoding desired content in HTML, applying formatting controls in CSS, using FTP and provided website to publish the site, and writing and compiling the website content. Continued on next page…

×