Today’s sessions for CRADLE conference 2020.
Most of the sessions have two presentations. I attend the
following:
Then the first session themed ‘learning in a digital world
1’ is with Dr. Adam Brown and Emily Wade from Deakin. They present on
‘Serendipity, imperfection and vulnerability: Harnessing live video for
‘authentic’ teacher performance.
Adam began with providing the theoretical background and
approaches.
Proposed the undertaking of ‘the meddlers in the middle’ as
the role of the educator as opposed to ‘stage on the sage’ or ‘guide on the
side’. Meddlers in the middle reposition the teacher and student as
co-directors and co-editors of their social world.
Need to be ‘authentic’ and that authenticity is an effect,
not an essence in the context of self-presentation as being performative.
Emily introduced collaborative autoethnography and how
digital platforms like Periscope may be used to enable collaborative work. Explained
how this was used for their own teaching context and shared reflections on the
process.
Very much an academic look into their teaching and a
critical reflection into how video impacts on, supports and extends their
teaching practice.
Session 2: Learning in a digital world 2.
This session chaired by Simon Knight.
On ‘Development of educational tools that enable large-scale
ethical empirical research on evaluative judgement' with Dr. Hassan Khosravi
from the University of Queensland. Presented on work carried out with others –
George Gyamfi, Dr. Barbara Hanna and Dr. Jason Lodge.
Presented on evaluative judgement (EJ), educational tools,
conceptual models and examples.
EJ is the capability to make decisions about the quality of
work of oneself and others. This skill helps students use feedback effectively,
develop expertise in the view and attain autonomy.
EF revolves around
rubrics, self assessment exemplars, feedback, reflection and peer assessment –
mostly theoretical.
Educational tools include peer grading and evaluation systems. Most build without the aim of supporting research and they do not allow data harvesting to be undertaken or the set up of controlled experiments. Draws on work of Associate Professor Paul Denny (University of Auckland) on PeerWise and with Professor Neil Heffernan on the ASSISTments ecosystems.
This presentation on the conceptual framework of RIPPLE.
Conceptual model described to help promote both EJ and to undertake research on
it. System developed for adaptive learning, learnersourcing and peer grading
and feedback with EJ strategies of rubrics, self and peer assessment and
exemplars. Connected to metrics, experiment design and ethical guidelines and a
data repository.
Provides details of the RIPPLE platform.
Shared one study – Can students create high-quality resources?
Walked through the process of students creating and evaluating each other’s
questions.
The shared a case study and reflections. In general,
students’ EJ improved through iterations. Students tended to provide higher
ratings when compared to instructors. Found that the rubric criteria may not suit
the ‘assessment’ and re-tested new rubric.
Shared plans for new investigations and encouraged other
researchers to make contact to use the tool.
Followed on with George Gyamfi, also from UQ on ‘The effect
of rubrics on evaluative judgement: A randomised controlled trial'. As per above
presentation, George’s work is completed with Dr. Barbara Hanna and Dr. Hassan
Khosravi.
Defined EJ as per previous presentation. Shared work on rubrics
(Reddy & Andrade, 2010 and several others) and how these may be used to
enhance student learning. These studies tend to be mostly theoretical and does
not bring in the perspectives of students.
Overviewed the research methodology and how RiPPLE was used
for the study. Participants were undergraduate students (n= 354) learning database
principles. The study involved having a control group which completed peer
assessments without a rubric and the treatment group which completed peer
assessments with a rubric.
Findings indicate rubrics can be a way of influencing how
students attend to quality and can impact students’ judgement in assessing the
quality of learning resources. However, construct of the rubric is the key! Even
without rubrics, learners are able to make judgements but rubrics provided better
clarity.
Session three: Assessment of learning 1 :
Session chaired by Zi Yan.
Dr. Sin Wang Chong from the Queen’s University Belfast
presented on ‘Student feedback literacy as an ecological construct’. A
conceptual look at feedback literacy covering feedback orientation to feedback
literacy, feedback literacy in and beyond the classroom and a reconceptualization
of the concept. Presentation based on paper published earlier this year.
Shared study on feedback orientation (London & Smither’s
2002) – utility, accountability, social awareness and feedback efficacy. Also
Kremmel & Harding (2020) on language literacy – using a spider chart to
provide each learners’ literacy. Then Sutton (2012) in conceptualisation of
feedback literacy as epistemology (knowing), Ontological (being) and practical
(acting). Carless and Boud (2018) appreciate, make judgments, manage affect and
take action on feedback. Most recent Carless and Winstone (2020) looking into
both teacher and learner feedback literacy.
Feedback literacy is not only a product (Hattie & Timperley,
2007) but also a process (Interpersonal and intrapersonal (Carless & Boud,
2018).
Chong reconceptualised using a ecological perspective (2020
paper) to include the context within which feedback is undertaken
(interpersonal, textual, instructional, sociocultural) and the learner’s
beliefs, goals, experiences and abilities. Therefore the engagement dimension
(as proposed by Carless and Boud – understand feedback, manage affect, make
judgment and take action) has added to it the context and individual dimensions(
Introduced the ecological systems theory (EST) as nested or
networked EST with micro, meso, exo, macro and chrono systems. Used example
from a paper in preparation – process of scholarly peer-review – to explain the
framework. Proposed actor-network theory as a means to understand better the
inter-connections/inter-relationships of ESTs.
Concluded with implications including how the framework may
be applied towards better understanding the contextual and individual contributions
to understanding feedback literacy.
The next session is with Dr. Akilu Tadesse from the University
of Bergen on ‘Scaffolding feedback in complex dynamic system context: Effect of
online interactive learning environments’. Presents on work undertaken with Professors Pai Davidsen and Erling Moxnes.
People, even experts, have difficulties in understanding and communicating their understanding of complex dynamic systems. Also difficult to measure improvements in this domain when CDS are difficult to understand.
The study looks into how to enhance students learning of CDS by developing educaitonal feedback to scaffold feedback that supports students learning.
Shared the notion of scaffolding feedback as a continual spiral of building knowledge. Gaps of knowledge are 'filled either by students' own efforts are through support from 'external agents'.
Used this scaffolding feedback notion to integrate into a personalised and adaptive online learning environment. Learner is presented with a CDS and supported to progress through a sequence of learning activities to attain CDS.
Shared a 'case study' to help explain the concept of how the platform works. Then presented the research questions - to find out if scaffolding feedback would reduce the gap between existing high and low performing students. Averaged results across 5 tasks. In general, the gap did close as tasks (increasing in complexity) were worked through.
Overall, a good range of presentations showing the ways digital technologies may be useful in supporting assessments of learning.
No comments:
Post a Comment