Course Rationale
Course: Course Design for Digital Environments
Student ID: s2006490
Assignment 2
Course Rationale:
Summary:
“Digital Strategies for Human Rights Activists” - a highly dynamic topic – constantly developing and changing. Digital activists striving towards best possible use of innovative use of ICT and reducing threads. A topic too complex for individual learning, a topic depended on knowing where to find the relevant information instead of learning specific literature and a topic highly context and culture related.
The course design is build based on a structured analysis of the potential audience, content, learners needs and objectives. Usage of various methods for course design such as the persona approach for audience characterization, to select an appropriate format and approach, the ABC learning types (see Young, CLIVE and Perović, Nataša, 2020) for storyboarding.
Generally, the course design uses a variety of learning design approaches, such as the socio- cultural theory of learning, connectivism and connected learning as well as curriculum process. As the audience is presumably of great heterogeneity, a non-colonialist design is considered as a core value. The benefits of technological enhanced learning design is integrated following elements of the 3e approach. Limitations are persisting colonialist tendencies and the dependence on a proactive audience.
How to find the appropriate course design?
The first step to initiate an effective course designing process, is a structured analysis of the potential audience and their respective needs, interests, limitations, and experiences in the field of digital education and professional digital activism.
Learning design models such as the 7c’ model,
“Conceptualize: What is the vision for the learning intervention, who is it being designed for, what is the essence of the intervention, what pedagogical approaches are used?” (Conole. 2015, page 504)
or the ADDIE Instructural Design Modell
“The Analysis phase can be considered as the “Goal-Setting Stage.” The focus of the designer in this phase is on the target audience. “ (Kurth, 2017)
promote to start with this stage before entering deciding on the learning approach or types. With missing possibility to directly contact the potential target groups the persona and user story approach was used to shift the focus from subject specialists designing the course to adding the learner’s perspectives into the analysis. Personas are usually used in agile product development processes but shifting the focus on user experiences and interests was considered helpful in the process.
Picture 1:Example of persona approach - Link
The user story approach was taken from agile process steering. During the course design the developers must take the perspective of the learners and describe the potential aims and learning objectives. This approach is shifting the focus to users and to talking about expected learning aims instead of written descriptions. As a result of the analysis phase six core aspects were identified to frame the future design: Complex & dynamic; exchange & experience oriented; context & culture integration
Rationale for the learning approach and learning types selected:
Based on the analysis the design uses on a combination of mainly connected, connectivism and socio-cultural theories of learning as well as the idea of curriculum as process and non – colonialist design, to ensure high flexibility, state of the art use of technology and support the planned group dynamics.
Why Socio – cultural theory as learning approach?
The audience is expected to be skilled and experienced in activism or human rights approaches as well as deeply embedded into their cultural context. The level of knowledge on how to best use digital means for activism varies. Therefore, the sociocultural theory following Vygotsky’s key themes of sociocultural learning – the importance of the cultural, the language and the proximity of instructors – are adequate to fullfill the idea of cultural and context related course activities and the focus on interaction instead of individual activities. (see Pappas, Christopher, 2014). To enhance collaborative work, source access and integration of expertise outside the direct learning environment through ICT is where sociocultural theories also put emphasis on. (see Khvilon, Evgueni, Patru, Mariana, 2002, page 26)
Why Connected learning as learning approach?
Constant change of digital infrastructure, platforms, possibilities, tools, and technical developments make it impossible for activists to know and learn every possible strategy, approach, or tool. Based on this precondition, the “connected learning” framework is a source of guidance. Selwyn 2017 describes connected learning as a process of learning with networked technologies putting emphasis on the social interaction and the individual social context.
Why Connectivsm as learning approach?
Digital strategies for human rights activism is about knowing where to find information, assess the quality, connect sources, and content and use the information appropriately. Theory and literature can be important but the new emphasis in learning is on connecting to specialized information nodes and sources (see Selwyn 2017, page 89). Important to be considered is that information is stored and manipulated by digital technology and a core objective of the course is to make sure that participants know where to find information, how to assess it, how to use it and possibly to best manage the knowledge sources.
Why Curriculum theory as learning approach?
Curriculum as a process is followed to tackle the difficulty to adhere to a non – colonialist design and to put the learner’s perspective and the learning effects in the center of the design. Overcoming the predefined outcomes practice towards a design based on close collaboration of teachers and students. The vision of the approach is to consider the syllabus of a course is not a package of set materials to be covered, give participants a voice and accept the uniqueness of each “classroom” setting (see Smith, 2013). Elements of curriculum as a praxis are integrated to focus on giving the local expert audience as much possibility to design the curriculum as possible. During group work and the development of the final artefact, the participants have a high flexibility to choose the format they prefer or can access (see Bali, 2018, page 35)
Why a non – colonialist design?
“Teachers are needed to aid in nurturing the habits and consciousness necessary to create a society where everyone feels valued and respected regardless of cultural context.” (Watson, 2021). A non – colonialist approach and design should a core ingredient when designing a course for an international, multicultural audience but the implementation is difficult. The dominance of literature from developed countries, the problems with strongly behavioristic approaches, missing collaborative approaches and the digital divide in digital infrastructure, connectivity as well as time differences are challenges not easy to overcome. The course design tries to cope with the challenges through various ideas and practices to generate a level of equality. The course objectives are developed collaboratively, all live sessions are recorded, and the general approach is focusing on collaborative exchange of cultural experiences, context related measures and a flexible design.
None of the approaches is followed in detail. The approaches have similarities and differences, strengths and weaknesses and therefore need to be adapted or combined. The learning approach was transformed into practices and to structure the design phase and storyboarding the ABC Learning Design learning types cards were used. Due to its character the learning type of acquisition is reduced to a minimum. The strength of the course is in its flexibility, its openness, and the dominance of collaboration (discussion and group work), investigation (real – life simulations) and production (development of a strategy).
The active and practical use of applications, tools and methods the internet offers, follows the idea of the 3e framework by enhancing the adoption of technology in simple and effective ways, extending the further use of technology to increase choice and control and empowerment. (see Edinburg Napier University, 2020).
Picture 2: Storyboard developed on padlet – Link
Effects of #CDDE on the course design
The course design is highly influenced by the content discussed in CDDE. As my primary focus is on designing courses for international audiences mainly situated in the global south, the readings by Smith (2013) and Bali & Sharma (2018) were highly inspiring and influential. The ideas of a more open but not too open curriculum were adapted by putting an educational proposal such as preformulated user stories as a starting point and let the group (trainer and participants) develop content and means together framed by the collaboratively designed user stories (see Smith 2020). Bali & Sharma discussed the curriculum theory discussion in combination with the colonialist tendencies of MOOCs. Even though typical trainings with and for an audience in the south often actively trying to avoid colonialist tendencies, they are embedded in the system of the better knowing trainer – often from the global north – and the recipient and less knowing individual from the global south. This is an exaggeration but nevertheless but the discourse about the balance between an institutional intention and the trainers’ intentions is prevailing (see Bali & Sharma, 2018, page 39). The idea has influenced this course design into constantly focusing on the users perspective, integrating the local culture and context whenever possible and trying to avoid colonialist elements usually starting with ensuring the equality of access for all participants to content and engagement.
Another crucial part of the course design was to think about the appropriate learning approach. Following the discussions on design thinking in week 2 and 3 a major aspect taken out to build my own course design was the importance of using a structured approach and to consider the aspect on how technology can enhance the learning process when planning any course. There is a great variety of models putting emphasis on different aspects of a course design with varying quality (see Bower & Vlachopoulos, 2018, page 991) and therefore I did not follow any of the designs thoroughly. The guiding questions of the ADDIE and 7c model were used during the analysis phase to structure the process.
The use of a set of learning types and possible learners activities taken from Diana Laurillards – “Teaching as a Design Science” and used in the ABC Learning design approach was helpful and consistently used when designing the storyboard (see https://padlet.com/treinhardt19811/storyboard). Finally, the decision to use a combination of learning theories – or at least aspects out of them - evolved based on my experience of limitation when using solely one approach during the group work in CDDE and the feedback received from my course tutor on my first assignment.
“I think your discussion and critique of PBL begged the question of whether you saw a combination of approaches, theories, or frameworks more suitable, and if so, what that framework would consist of (if not solely a PBL approach)”
Limitations and constraints on the course design
A major limitation is the immense use of technologically enhanced learning elements to enhance knowledge and self-confidence of participants while at the same time trying to develop a design reducing the effects of the existing digital divide between those with good connectivity and digital education and those without. Following Bali & Sharma the more technologically advanced and therefore dependent on the bandwidth the design becomes the more it is rather less colonizing instead of non-colonizing (see Bali & Sharma, 2018, page 39). An aspect the course design struggled to handle appropriately.
The mix of methods and approaches to add flexibility and self-determination into the course design and the reduction of acquisition elements following the behavioralist is challenging. It expects participants to take an active part in a fully digital design which is rather more difficult to achieve a community feeling as we have in in -classroom situations. To activate participants through appropriate methods and engaging tools is crucial for success or failure and was only selected due to the analysis of the audience using the persona approach. But still trainers need to follow carful the course dynamic, eventually adding synchronous elements or provide guidance and overview on the vast set of possibilities participants must unfold their capabilities. A general advantage of offering this design in a training setting instead of a secondary or tertiary sector is that there is no need for public examinations. It is about building capacities and primary about receiving the course competition certificate. An open and flexible design in other context is more demanding for the teachers.
But still even with the intention to build an open and flexible curriculum there are elements of an already defined structure and content embedded in the design. It needs a highly skilled trainer to keep the idea of a flexible design.
Using only elements out of the deep and detailed theory of learning approaches is a limitation or might be considered by education experts as problematic as no approach is strictly followed. Others might see it as an experimental approach in the tradition of the curriculum as a process idea in which every part of the course design is to be seen in the context of learning and therefore a central concern for the teacher – even though these elements are taken from various traditions (see Smith 2020).
Reference List:
- Bali, M. & Sharma, S. (2018) Envisioning post-colonial MOOCs Critiques and ways forward. In M. K. Rebecca Bennett (Ed.), Massive Open Online Courses and Higher Education What Went Right, What Went Wrong and Where to Next? (1st Edition).
- Bower, M. and Vlachopoulos, P. (2018) ‘A critical analysis of technology-enhanced learning design frameworks’, British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(6), pp. 981–997.
- Edinburg Napier University. The 3e Framework explained. Available at: www.staff.napier.ac.uk/services/vice-principal-academic/academic/TEL/TechBenchmark/Pages/3E.aspx (Accessed 20.12.2020).
- Conole, G. (2015) The 7Cs of learning design. In J. Dalziel (Ed.), Learning design: conceptualizing a framework for teaching and learning online (pp. 117–145). New York: Routledge.
- Khvilon, Evgueni, Patru, Mariana (2002) Information and communication technologies in teacher education: a planning guide.
- Kurt, S. (2017) "ADDIE Model: Instructional Design," in Educational Technology, August 29, 2017. Available at: https://educationaltechnology.net/the-addie-model-instructional-design/ (Accessed: 14.12.2020).
- Pappas, Christopher (2014) Instructional Design Models and Theories: The Sociocultural Learning Theory. Available at www.elearningindustry.com/sociocultural-learning-theory (Accessed 19.12.2020).
- Roofe, Carmel (2017) Intercultural Studies of Curriculum: Theory, Policy and Practice. Springer.
- Smith, M. K. (2013) ‘What is curriculum? Exploring theory and practice’, infed.org, 18 April. Available at: http://infed.org/mobi/curriculum-theory-and-practice/.
- User Experience (UX) Design (2020) Available at: www.interaction-design.org/literature/topics/ux-design (Accessed 18.12.2020).
- Watson, Breda (2021) Making Education Fit for Democracy: Closing the Gap Available at:books.google.de/books?id=cq73DwAAQBAJ&pg=PT190&lpg=PT190&dq=#v=onepage&q&f=false (Accessed 21.12.2020)
- Learning Design @ UCL, Digital Education, UCL Available at: UCL abc-ld (Accessed: 19.12.2020).
Reference List Pictures:
Picture 1: Reinhardt, Thomas (2020). Digital Strategies for Human Rights Activists. Available at: https://mm.tt/1722743782?t=NXmfbgdnoX (Assessed 16.12.2020).
Picture 2: Reinhardt, Thomas (2020) Digital Strategies for Human Rights Activists. Available at: https://padlet.com/treinhardt19811/storyboard (Assessed 20.12.2020).
#curriculumasaprocess #cennectivism #non-colonisingcoursedesign #connected learning
- Trainer : Thomas Reinhardt