Helping students and teachers create their own learning resources
TAFE NSW VET Pedagogy Project 2006 managed by Lynne Stallard, ICVET
INTERVIEW | Billie Ayling, Centre for Learning Innovation (CLI)
The challenge for us is to connect directly with students, so we know how they use or would like to use the materials we provide.
Billie Ayling
Summary
- Main meanings of ‘learning style’ = (a) preferences for practical, hands-on tasks vs taking in theory and (b) differences in ability to quickly grasp information
- It’s not just 'styles' that educators need to take into account, but 'needs' such as the need to improve one’s language level, or to learn without having to wade through text
- Students’ concepts of learning (eg, learning by systematically studying from a textbook; learning by flicking around a television or computer screen) impact on how they approach materials
- There’s a shift underway from whole pre-packaged courses, to much smaller packaged bundles (learning objects, available via intranet) which teachers can assemble according to their requirements
Stance
Balancing the virtues of uniformity with a wish to provide flexible, responsive learning experiences
Changing approaches to the design of learning resources
In the past, staff in my area of OTEN have tended to work as part of a project team to develop print-based materials which were posted out to students. Our other role was commercial work—for example, for an industry client, for a private RTO or another part of TAFE. It all contributed to a growing expertise not only in print material, but in multimedia.
Now, our role is shifting, from production of learning materials to an advisory role to help other people develop resources. Let me try to summarise the kind of advice we'd give about designing learning material to accommodate learners.
Learning ‘styles’ vs ‘needs’
When it comes to 'learning styles', I don't know that we discriminate too well between 'learning styles' and 'learner needs'. It's easy enough to make assumptions about what learners might need or want, but too often they're based on data about students' demographics or social factors, not really on how they like to learn.
Instead of 'styles', we tend to focus on 'needs'. A 'need' might be language development, or engaging students who find text-based learning difficult. Things like that are broader-brush categories than learning styles.
We do talk about 'task-based learning' or 'doing' approaches to learning—doing things, and then trying to get students to draw conclusions and, based on them, try to develop concepts. We also talk about 'holding students in a sequence' by giving clear instructions and signposts. We also talk about 'chunking' learning. This means that at the end of each section, there is a review which brings things together before going on.
Uniform delivery vs different learning approaches
To some extent, if we're talking about print-based materials, this kind of instructional design does steer students in particular directions, so they all have to go through some sequences in a uniform way. Print, by its very nature, tends to be a linear mode. We try to build in different pathways, but even if we were to say to students, 'do this quiz and then, if you need to, do these readings; otherwise go on to the next chapter', we'd still find that most students will just follow along the linear sequence.
As a general rule, we try to organise components of the materials in such a way that students can identify what they don't know, through a 'check-your-progress' section or quiz. Once they do these, they get feedback which would also guide the student in certain directions. If they need to, the student can then access supplementary material to go over what they don't know.
This kind of design works particularly well in the online environment. It caters well to different levels of knowledge and aptitude, students who catch on quickly are not held back, but students who need extra help can get it. Online materials have opened up new ways to accommodate student differences. That's because navigation structures are much more flexible. Of course, you need to make sure that, in an attempt to make things flexible, you don't build in so many options that materials end up spidery and students lose their way.
In an online environment, it's harder to get students to persevere. If they follow a series of clicks that take them nowhere, and get lost, they're likely to give up on the whole resource. In the online environment, attention and reward are very important.
Learner approaches to material varies a lot. No matter how it's presented, some learners will start by printing everything out, and then arranging it into a linear sequence. Then you get young people used to flicking across television stations who will move around a site fairly quickly.
It's relevant to mention learner management systems here, like NSW TAFE's Janison Toolbox. It tends to be somewhat book-like, with its modules and topics, and an index down the left-hand side. It's all a fairly linear arrangement. Young people could cope with a much more visual (and less linear) set-up.
Content vs process considerations
The online environment is very well suited to group forums, discussions and various communication activities. We've rushed to put in too much content, with too little emphasis on group-work and students learning from each other. The reason we've tended to put a lot of content into online materials goes back to early thinking about teaching online. Our brief was to put content online, and it was assumed that teachers could adapt the materials and couple them with group-work.
It did work like that for a while: the first teachers to start using online materials generally had the skills to modify the materials and combine them with group activities. But as things progressed, more and more teachers started using the materials as they were, just getting students to use the information directly. So we're now putting a lot more emphasis on encouraging teachers to do more than just use the content, and to take advantage of things like email and forums.
Into the future, I think that a clearer distinction will be made between, on the one hand, packaged learning resources for specific audiences and, on the other, repositories of source content accessible by searching the TAFE intranet (the so-called 'learning objects'). By 'learning object', I mean a bundle of information relating to a particular skill, with some learning activities built in as well.
Learning resources with inbuilt flexibility
The challenge for us is to connect directly with students, so we know how they use or would like to use the materials we provide. But more than that, we want to help students and teachers create their own learning resources. Part of that scenario is to pre-package materials for easy disaggregation and modification, and the other is helping students design their own learning sequences and resources.
When we put together a complete resource on a particular area, we'd not only include the related learning objects, but some integrating material such as some case studies which allow some tailoring for different learning styles or situations.
When we're designing materials for a range of learners, probably the main two learner types we're catering to are (a) people who like to do things practically and learn from that; and (b) people who are quick to grasp information and can learn quite quickly.
We also know that visual cues are important for all learners, so we try to make a lot of use of flowcharts and illustrations. And finally, we always try to provide exercises which allow students to contribute their own experience.
