Inquiry-based learning (IBL) puts the learners' curiosity into the center of educational experiences. Designing IBL requires to consider the learners' agency in their own learning. As if designing learning activities is not complex enough, learner agency adds an additional layer of design decisions. Based on prior research and projects with different audiences, this workshop structures the design space for creating inquiry learning experiences.
This slidedeck is part of a hands-on workshop for designing mobile IBL experiences. The workshop took place on 11 April 2019 at IADIS Mobile Learning conferences in Utrecht.
ICT Role in 21st Century Education & its Challenges.pptx
Designing Mobile Inquiry-based Learning Activities: Learners' Agency and Technology Affordances
1. Designing Mobile Inquiry-Based
Learning Activities: Learners’ Agency
& Technological Affordances
Esther Tan, Christian Glahn, & Marcus Specht
Delft University of Technology, Netherlands
Centre for
Education
and
Learning
2. Part I: Mobile Learning in the Era of Digital Mobility:
design challenges by C. Glahn
Part II: Mobile Learning Activities: Learners’ agency &
technological affordances by E. Tan
Workshop Outline Centre for
Education
and
Learning
3. Part I: Mobile Learning in the Era of Digital
Mobility: Design challenges
22. Task completion
Task reminders
Data granularity
Data recency
Pre-defined tasks
Photos
GPS
Structured info
Text Notes
Task reporting
Temporal sequences
Reviewing collected
data
Forms
Incident recoding
Non-tasked data
Geo tagging
Photos
Interviews
Expand/update data
Task arrangement
Ad-hoc decisions
23. Task completion
Task reminders
Data granularity
Data recency
Pre-defined tasks
Photos
GPS
Structured info
Text Notes
Task reporting
Temporal sequences
Reviewing collected
data
Forms
Incident recoding
Non-tasked data
Geo tagging
Photos
Interviews
Expand/update data
Task arrangement
Ad-hoc decisions
Learner agency doesn’t
have to be maximized
along all dimensions
24. Part II: Mobile Learning Activities: Learners’
Agency & Technological Affordances
Case Study: Singapore Future School Project - mobile inquiry-based
learning trails at Sentosa Island & Singapore River
https://www.visitsingapore.com/see-do-singapore/places-to-see/sentosa/
http://singaporeriverih.blogspot.com/p/singapore-river.html
25. Singapore River – Then & Now
Learning objectives:
§ Inquiry-based Learning: BIG Question
(BIG: Beyond Information Given)
§ Collaborative Knowledge Building
§ Integrated conceptual understanding
(History, Geography & Biology)
26. Inquiry-based learning with a Beyond Information
Given (BIG) question: Why does civilization
begin at river mouth?
27. 1. Levels of pre-structuringDesign of the
Mobile Learning Trail
§ Position the learning trail as part of formal
curriculum with pre & post-trail phase
§ Provide an unstructured activity for small groups to
pursue their own research inquiries after the
completion of all trail activities
Pre-Trial
Tune-in
Activity
In-Trail
Activities
Post-Trial
Summary of
learning
28. 2. Task structuredness: from performative
task to knowledge synthesis task
Description of tasks
Asian
Civilisation
Museum
Performative 1. Trace the Singapore River course
Performative 2. Measure the river water conditions
Knowledge Generative 3. Singapore River: Then & Now
Knowledge Synthesis 4. Singapore River: Source of migration
Clarke Quay Performative 1. Measure the river water conditions
Performative 2. Locate the ideal water conditions
Knowledge Generative 3. Describe the ideal water conditions
Knowledge Synthesis 4. Discuss the importance of water
quality
29. 3. Technology & Learners’ Agency
Immediacy of feedback & social interaction
§ Web-based platform hosting all trail tasks, students’
collected data & artifacts
§ Virtual facilitation: broadcast alert & feedback features
§ iPads with embedded apps
30. Geography
Learning Trail
The Fall of
Singapore Trail
British Defense
Strategy Trail
River
MysteryTrail
March 2010
Sentosa Island
July 2010
World War II
Battle Sites
March 2011
Fort Siloso
August 2012
Singapore River
What are the
main reasons
for the fall of
Singapore to
Japan?
What is the
role of Sentosa
in the British’s
big plan of
defence?
Why does
civilization start
at river mouth?
Time & Site
BIG question
Progressive Refinement &
Adaptation
Iterative Design of the Mobile Learning Trails
31. Geography
Learning Trail
The Fall of
Singapore Trail
British Defense
Strategy Trail
River
MysteryTrail
March 2010
Sentosa Island
July 2010
World War II
Battle Sites
March 2011
Fort Siloso
August 2012
Singapore River
What are the
main reasons
for the fall of
Singapore to
Japan?
What is the
role of Sentosa
in the British’s
big plan of
defence?
Why does
civilization start
at river mouth?
Time & Site
BIG question
Progressive Refinement &
Adaptation
Iterative Design of the Mobile Learning Trails
Findings
Lack of continuity
& intentional
learning
3-stage model
(pre-to-post trail
to connect varying
contexts of
learning)
Repair Strategies in Design
32. Geography
Learning Trail
The Fall of
Singapore Trail
British Defense
Strategy Trail
River
MysteryTrail
March 2010
Sentosa Island
July 2010
World War II
Battle Sites
March 2011
Fort Siloso
August 2012
Singapore River
What are the
main reasons
for the fall of
Singapore to
Japan?
What is the
role of Sentosa
in the British’s
big plan of
defence?
Why does
civilization start
at river mouth?
Time & Site
BIG question
Progressive Refinement &
Adaptation
Iterative Design of the Mobile Learning Trails
Findings
Lack of continuity
& intentional
learning
Lack of deep
discourse
3-stage model
(pre-to-post trail
to connect varying
contexts of
learning)
Embed unforeseen
variables &
contextual
resources
Repair Strategies in Design
33. Geography
Learning Trail
The Fall of
Singapore Trail
British Defense
Strategy Trail
River
MysteryTrail
March 2010
Sentosa Island
July 2010
World War II
Battle Sites
March 2011
Fort Siloso
August 2012
Singapore River
What are the
main reasons
for the fall of
Singapore to
Japan?
What is the
role of Sentosa
in the British’s
big plan of
defence?
Why does
civilization start
at river mouth?
Time & Site
BIG question
Progressive Refinement &
Adaptation
Iterative Design of the Mobile Learning Trails
Findings
Lack of continuity
& intentional
learning
Lack of deep
discourse
Task-focused >
understanding
focused
3-stage model
(pre-to-post trail
to connect varying
contexts of
learning)
Embed unforeseen
variables &
contextual
resources
Embed
unstructured
activity &
facilitate common
grounds
Repair Strategies in Design
34. Mobile Learning Trails
Key findings:
§ Task structuredness: the well-structured tasks
leading to the ill-structured task types enabled a
gradual increase of learner’s capacity for
reflective inquiry (scaffolding)
§ Technological mediation enhanced students’
autonomy and thereby increased students’
capacity to take control of their learning journey:
Students were able to re-evaluate their initial
findings and re-negotiate meaning based on the
immediacy of feedback.
35. Hands-on Session (1 hour)
Define a contextualized inquiry-based learning
experience
§ Define min. 5 inquiry sub-activities
§ Focus on the use of mobile devices
§ Focus on learner agency
§ Prepare to present
your IBL experience
Tools & Technologies
Guidance
Context
36. Challenges & Implications
1. Design Intentional learning Experiences Across
Contexts, Spaces & Time
§ Reduce the ‘novelty space’: 3-stage Model (Pre-to-post)
§ Connecting the different learning contexts
§ Structured/ Unstructured learning activity (levels of
inquiry): desired learning processes/ outcomes
§ Outdoor learning: open spaces vs enclosed spaces
§ Design for students’ capacity for autonomous learning
§ Promote interdisciplinary thinking and discourse
37. Outdoor open space e.g. a
river trail, a nature ramble.
Outdoor enclosed space e.g.,
tunnel at a fortress, exhibition
area inside a castle.
Challenges & Implications
38. 2. Teacher agency vs. learner autonomy vs. technological
affordances
§ Learning context and content (“phygital spaces”)
§ Learner profile and learner readiness; and
§ Socio-cultural practices
Challenges & Implications
Tools & Technologies
Guidance
Context
39. Thank You for Your
Participation!
Centre for
Education
and
Learning
40. References
Journal Publications
§ Tan, E. & So, H. J. (2018). Role of Environmental Interaction in
Interdisciplinary Thinking: from Knowledge Resources Perspectives. The
Journal of Environmental Education. DOI: 10.1080/00958964.2018.1531280
§ So, H. J., Zhang, X. J. & Tan, E. (2016). Learning about Collaborative
Knowledge Building: A Case of Future School in Singapore. Journal of Learner-
Centered Curriculum and Instruction. 16 (10), 565 – 591.
§ Cober, R., Tan, E., Slotta, J.D., So, H.J., & Könings, K.D (2015). Teachers as
participatory designers: two case studies with technology-enhanced learning
environments. Instructional Science (2015). DOI: 10.1007/s11251-014-9339-0
§ Tan, E. & So, H. J. (2015). Rethinking the impact of activity design on a mobile
learning trail: The missing dimension of the physical affordances. IEEE
Transactions on Learning Technologies. DOI: 10.1109/TLT.2014.2376951
§ So, H. J., Tan, E., & Tay, J. (2012). Collaborative mobile learning in situ from
knowledge building perspectives. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher.
21:1, pp. 51-62.
41. References
Book Chapters
§ So, H. J., Tan, E., Y. Wei., & Zhang, X. J. (2015). What makes the design of
mobile learning trails effective: A retrospective analysis (pp. 335-352). In L. S.
Wong., M. Milard., & M. Specht. (Eds.), Seamless learning in the age of mobile
connectivity, (pp.335 – 352). Singapore: Springer.
§ So, H. J. & Tan, E. (2014). Designing the situation for pervasive knowledge
building: Future school experiences. In Tan, S. C., So, H. J. and J. Yeo, J.
(Eds.), Knowledge creation in education, (pp. 123-142). Springer.
§ Glahn, C. & Gruber, M.R. (2018). Mobile Blended Learning. In In C. De Witt &
C. Gloerfeld (Eds.) Handbuch Mobile Learning, pp. 303-320. Berlin,
Heidelberg: Springer.
§ Glahn, C. & Gruber, M.R. (2019, in press). Designing for Context-aware and
Contextualized Learning. In Ally, M., Su, C. & Tsinakos, A. (Eds.), Emerging
Technologies and Pedagogies in the Curriculum. Heidelberg et al.: Springer.
Paper source for 15th ICML Workshop
§ Suárez, Á., Specht, M., Prinsen, F., Kalz, M., & Ternier, S. (2018). A review of the
types of mobile activities in mobile inquiry-based learning. Computers &
Education, 118, 38-55.
42. Conference Proceedings
§ Tan, E., Rusman, E., Firssova, O., Ternier, S., Specht, M., Klemke, R., & So, H. J.
(2018). Mobile Inquiry-based Learning: Relationship among levels of inquiry,
learners’ autonomy and environmental interaction. In D. Parsons, R. Power, A.
Palalas, H. Hambrock & K. MacCallum (Eds.), Proceedings of 17th World
Conference on Mobile and Contextual Learning (pp. 22-29). Concordia University
Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. Retrieved November 30, 2018
from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/184919/.
§ Rusman, E., Tan, E., & Firssova, O. (2018). Dreams, realism and critics of
stakeholders on implementing Seamless Learning Scenario’s in Dutch Secondary
education. In D. Parsons, R. Power, A. Palalas, H. Hambrock & K. MacCallum
(Eds.), Proceedings of 17th World Conference on Mobile and Contextual
Learning (pp. 88-96). Concordia University Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. Retrieved
November 30, 2018 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/184927/.
§ Tan, E., & So, H. J. (2016). Students’ Use of Knowledge Resources in
Environmental Interaction on an Outdoor Learning Trail. In Looi, C. K., Polman, J. L.,
Cress, U., and Reimann, P. (Eds.) (2016). Transforming Learning, Empowering
Learners: The International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2016,
Volume 2, (pp. 745-752). Singapore: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
References
43. § Tan, E. & So, H. J. (2015). How learners employ semiotic resources for
collaborative meaning-making in outdoor mobile learning. In Lindwall, O.,
Häkkinen, P., Koschman, T. Tchounikine, P. & Ludvigsen, S. (Eds.) (2015).
Exploring the Material Conditions of Learning: The Computer Supported
Collaborative Learning (CSCL) Conference 2015, Volume 1, (pp. 268-275).
Gothenburg, Sweden: The International Society of the Learning Sciences.
§ Tan, E. & So, H. J. (2013). Students’ Capacity for Autonomous Learning in an
Unstructured Learning Space on a Mobile Learning Trail. In Rummel, N., Kapur,
M., Nathan, M., & Puntambekar, S. (Eds.) (2013). To See the World and a Grain
of Sand: Learning across Levels of Space, Time, and Scale: CSCL 2013
Conference Proceedings Volume 2, (pp. 169-172). International Society of the
Learning Sciences.
References
44. § Tan, E., So, H. J., & Zhang, X. J. (2012). Teacher Agency and Student
Autonomy in an Inquiry-based Mobile Learning Trail. In the proceedings of
the 20th International Conference on Computers in Education (ICCE), Nov
26 to 30, 2012, Singapore.
§ Tan, E. & So, H. J. (2011). Location-based collaborative learning at a
Geography trail: Examining the relationship among task design, facilitation
and discourse types. In H. Spada, G. Stahl, N. Miyake, & N. Law. (Eds.).
Connecting computer-supported collaborative learning to policy and
practice: CSCL 2011 conference proceedings Vol. 1, (pp.41-48).
International Society of the Learning Sciences.
References