A presentation given at the international Pedagogic Research into Higher Education (PRHE) conference on 25th Oct 2010.
Authors: Peter Dangerfield, Tünde Varga-Atkins, Ian Ellis, Louis Vitone
Title: Student tool choice in enquiry-based learning: an activity theory analysis of a pilot project using an online social bookmarking tool (Diigo)
1. Student tool choice
in enquiry-based learning:
an activity theory analysis of a pilot project using
an online social bookmarking tool
Mon 25th October 2010, Session 2e, 2-3.30pm
PRHE 2010
Peter Dangerfield
Tünde Varga-Atkins
Ian Ellis
Louis Vitone
Acknowledgements to CEDP (CETL in Developing Professionalism)
3. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Browse others’
searches
Snowballing
Common interests
Social bookmarking
Portable ‘favourites’
Toolbar – saving
weblinks quickly
4. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Social bookmarking
5. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Diigo – tag cloud
6. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Context: the reflective professional
EBL (PBL) & social bookmarking
Aims: what influences student tool choice?
Methods
Findings
Discussion
Session outline
7. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
EBL - PBL
1. Clarify terms
from scenario
2. Define problem
3. Identify prior
knowledge
4. Review steps 2
and 3
5. Form learning
objectives
6. Individual study
7. Group sharing
of private study
Wood, D (2003)
Scenario
8. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
PBL group – which step?
9. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Analysis of problem: mind map
10. Mr Bridge
56 Married
Stomach juices
etc
Reluctant to change
Bad teeth
Clinical iceberg
OTC
Primary secondary
tertiary
Life style
advice
Stats for men women
going to doctor
OTC
Chronic
Reluctant to go to doctor
History NHS 1948
Triggers to
consultation
Roles staff (primary care
team)
Acid reflex
Autonomy
Smokes and
overweight (bad
life style)
Wife has ulcer
GIT tract
Endoscopy Biopsy
Liver Gallbladder
Normal results
Sick role Standard deviation
Normal
distribution
Blames beer curry
Vomiting
Symptoms associated with
indigestion
Inflammatory response
Production of
saliva
Peristalsis
Name teeth
Self medication
11. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Skills needed for developing reflective professional:
- Independent learning skills;
- Need to be adept at information skills (search, retrieve,
store, evaluate and synthesise information) (McGee and
Bee 2008);
Student characteristics:
- Diverse ICT skills;
- Most students use web2 for social life but not realise
potential for education (JISC/Ipsos Mori 2008, Trinder et al 2008, Boulous et al
2006);
Context
12. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Rationale: activity framework
People
Techniques
Resources
Research PBL
objectives
Student
Tools
Lifelong learning
13. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
What tools (people, techniques, resources)
do students use to research their PBL?
Introduce an online social bookmarking tool.
- How do students engage with the social
bookmarking tool?
- How do they value such a tool for their PBL
enquiry?
Aims: can students’ PBL learning be enhanced?
14. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Small scale study, pilot with first-year medics.
Focus groups & interviews.
- Piloted ‘walkthrough interview’.
Online engagement and statistics.
Email feedback.
Used activity theory to help interpret and
organise findings.
Methods
15. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
What tools (people, techniques, resources)
do students use to research their PBL?
How do students engage with the social
bookmarking tool?
How do they value such a tool for their PBL
enquiry?
Findings
16. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
What tools: individual resources
First years
books
internet
library search
VLE resources
Anatomy booklets
lectures
Anatomy
hands-on
17. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
What tools : talking to people
First years
Senior peers
Friends,
ex-school
friends
PBL group
Anatomy staffLecturers
Family,
relatives
PBL facilitator
18. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
What tools: learning techniques?
mnemonics
Note-taking
diagrams
drawings
mind maps
cue-cards
quizzes
copying
reflecting
19. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
How students used Diigo:
- As bookmarking weblinks for themselves;
- As sharing tool;
Social bookmarking tool: Diigo
“Agile learners” Initially interested fail to see benefit of tool?
[IT skill issues?/avoiders?]
20. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Social bookmarking
21. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Diigo – a group’s bookmarks
22. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Use / no use
Difficult at first but
got easier with use
I felt I had to get
used to so many
things
Very complicated at
start; easy once
sorted but not
enough comments
were made
Ineffective and
cumbersome
We had our own
system of sharing
information
Useful at first
23. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Continuance theory
(e.g. Chiu and Wang 2008, Lee 2010)
- What factors influence students’ continuing to use
technology?
- And what factors influence discontinuance ...?
Value of social bookmarking tool
Viewing technologies as ‘tools’ - metaphor is useful:
it places control in students’ hands (Stevenson 2007)
25. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Tool choice: continuance
“We had our own
way of sharing
information“
Results of study:
• first satisfaction with technology,
• then perceived usefulness,
• attitude,
• concentration, and
• perceived behavioural control
(necessary skills using technology)
(Lee 2010)
“Useful at
first“
26. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
“I felt I had to get
used to so many
new things “
Tool choice: continuance
Results of study:
•first satisfaction with technology,
•then perceived usefulness,
•attitude,
•concentration, and
•perceived behavioural control (necessary
skills using technology) (Lee 2010)
Ineffective and
cumbersome
27. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
“Very complicated
at start; easy once
sorted but not
enough comments
were made“
Tool choice: continuance
Social influence:
• Have people around adopted technology?
• They have an influence on continuance
and adoption. (contradicting Chiu and
Wang 2008 and confirming Lee 2010).
• Medical students: see importance of
(senior and current) peers.
28. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Importance of
- Utility (and here not much web links to share);
- Social influence;
Diverse ICT experiences -> large influence on uptake
- Majority students show more conservative pattern of
adoption/continuance of technologies;
- But: some agile learners!
Lack of technology use for learning (vs social);
- Confirms studies such as Beetham et al 2009
Findings suggest:
29. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Social bookmarking seems to be the least
adopted web 2 technology (versus wikis and
blogs) – why?
- Bookmarking about how individuals manage their notes,
resources ‘at home’? More difficult to shift?
Discussion 1
Battelemedia.com
30. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Bookmarking has potential to enhance learning –
but potential is not valued by students
(at least in this stage in which they use books more than the web)
- More appropriate in later in career?
- And will this change as technologies converge/advance?
Discussion 2
>
31. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Students do share e.g. Facebook.
- Sharing is an informal activity and not just the act of
posting/storing a link;
- Not seen as being a controlled environment.
Discussion 3
32. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Acknowledgements to CEDP (CETL)
The Road to the future?
Conclusions
33. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
QUESTIONS
Contact: tva@liv.ac.uk
34. STUDENT TOOL CHOICE IN ENQUIRY-BASED LEARNING DANGERFIELD & VARGA-ATKINS ET AL PRHE 2010 /35
Publications – previous project
•Developing professionalism through the use of wikis: a study with first-year
undergraduate medical students. Medical Teacher 32(10), October. 2010
•HEA MEDEV subject centre newsletter. Spring 2010. (Issue 21) Using wikis to
promote the personal and professional development of undergraduate medical
students: a report for the CETL in Developing Professionalism
Notes de l'éditeur
30 minutes
Question to audience: how many uses social bookmarking sites? Which ones?
How many know what they are and how they work?
Quick round question:
How many of you know about it?
How many of you use it?
Definition - Social bookmarking is a method for Internet users to share, organize, search, and manage bookmarks of web resources. Unlike file sharing, the resources themselves aren't shared, merely bookmarks that reference them. (Wikipedia April 22)
Features:
Saving weblinks – own accounts – accessible anywhere
Sharing weblinks bw groups and public
Search other people’s weblinks (the ‘social’ bookmarking) – benefit from other people’s findings if interested in same topic via social tagging (self-generated tags)
Toolbar.
Definition - Social bookmarking is a method for Internet users to share, organize, search, and manage bookmarks of web resources. Unlike file sharing, the resources themselves aren't shared, merely bookmarks that reference them. (Wikipedia April 22)
Features:
Saving weblinks – own accounts – accessible anywhere
Sharing weblinks bw groups and public
Search other people’s weblinks (the ‘social’ bookmarking) – benefit from other people’s findings if interested in same topic via social tagging (self-generated tags)
Toolbar.
Diverse, LLiDA + other refs
e.g. Stud33ents adept at using technologies for social life
But less so for their studies, education
In today’s fast developing information society and medical discipline, it is pivotal for medical trainees to develop as reflective professionals who are able to continuously learn, update and evaluate their own skills and knowledge. Professionals need to be “adept at locating and synthesising information from a variety of sources” (McGee&Bee 2008).
Although most of today’s students are ICT-literate, they may not possess adequate information skills to support their ability to critically evaluate internet-based resources in terms of their accuracy, authority and currency (Shanahan 2008). Students are also likely to use web2.0 technologies (e.g. blogs, wikis, social networking sites) in their social and personal lives (JISC/Ipsos MORI 2008), but not necessarily for their studies (Trinder et al 2008; Boulous et al 2006). Yet these technologies are becoming increasingly useful to busy medical professionals in their day-to-day work through the introduction of mobile Internet devices.
Landscape in total
Online tool particular interest
By tools we mean people, techniques and resources
Convert this into full activity diagram! (rules, div of labour, community)
What is the value of social bookmarking tool in the context of students’ research and reflection process, especially in context of PPD?
(How social bookmarking may enhance reflective research process?)
During PBL with whom nad how they interact?
How do these interactions contribute to their learning?
How do students engage with the tool?
What features of the tool do they use and value?
[this slide is just to show – not to talk over]
Small scale study, pilot with 2 PBL groups.
Focus groups & interviews.
Piloted a technique: walkthrough interview.
Online engagement and statistics- asked to be invited to social bookmarking groups.
Email feedback requested for clarification.
Used activity theory to help interpret and organise findings.
Context: information skills & reflection
Temporal: changing patterns from first to third year
Conflict: wanting direction vs discovery, independence
BUT this tension is the source of learning.
Issue of ‘depth’ in PBL learning objectives
DEPTH – how do we know how much to cover / learn
Purpose of using resources:
Source learning objectives (main source: BOOKs)
Lectures, HARC booklets guide on what/how much should be covered
techniques: working out from others’ learning objectives.
Some elements of personal preference in different books is showing.
Friends in same year, PBL group, senior peers, ex-school mates in other unis, staff in HARC
Family as resource, faculty, lecturers
The purpose of first years involving people – they are the main source of info to guide their PBL especially to see what DEPTH to go into the different learning objectives.
Senior peers seem to be quite important. As are the rest such as PBL group, facilitators.
Interesting their comparisons with exfriends from school at non-PBL unis.
These discussions, comparisons give them guidance and confidence to progress.
One important person left off the drawing: their own self!!
In first year note taking is predominant.
Some of these techniques are done individually, some in groups!
Useful in theory – but not used in practice:
Quantity
Utility vs effort
‘social’ element not utilised, recognised
We can look at the white/green ones- and analyse what makes them take up, continue or discontinue with tool – what makes them value and choose it?
Few took lead to set up groups – these few – ‘agile learners’ (Beetham et al 2009)
Some didn’t log on
Few saved resources + commented on
Definition - Social bookmarking is a method for Internet users to share, organize, search, and manage bookmarks of web resources. Unlike file sharing, the resources themselves aren't shared, merely bookmarks that reference them. (Wikipedia April 22)
Features:
Saving weblinks – own accounts – accessible anywhere
Sharing weblinks bw groups and public
Search other people’s weblinks (the ‘social’ bookmarking) – benefit from other people’s findings if interested in same topic via social tagging (self-generated tags)
Toolbar.
Report on how students interacted with Diigo
Contradicts diffusion theory (early adopters, early-late majority, laggards) Davis?
So what really happened?
Physical sharing: via f2f, FaceBook, email, text
First year- main source of information = books , not so much internet links
Role of sharing: to help guide students about DEPTH rather than share a physical resource.
Add other references
Useful in theory – but not used in practice:
Quantity
Utility vs effort
‘social’ element not utilised, recognised
May be a good tool in the later years when there are more internet searches
May be taken up by an ‘agile individuals’ (Beetham et al) rather than whole groups.
Results of study: first satisfaction w technology, then perceived usefulness, attitude, concentration, and perceived behavioural control (necessary skills using techn) (Lee Ming-Chi 2010)
[so in our study either students didn’t perceive this method to be useful – not intended to try it out or those trying it out were not satisfied with it?]
Satisfaction (Lee ming-Chi 2010 – most important)(Chiu & Wang 2008)
Perceived Usefulness or utility (Lee ming-Chi 2010 , Chiu & Wang 2008)
Attitude
Ease of use or effort expectancy (Lee ming-Chi 2010 Chiu & Wang 2008)
Social influence (contradicting Chiu and Wang 2008 and confirming Lee Ming-Chi 2010)
Lee also mentions the influence of the opinions of other people; if they find that other people around them adopted techn, they are more likely to do it too [CETL: peers, senior peers, facilitator, faculty etc.; our group was pilot so did not have this influence group ] (Lee Ming-Chi 2010
Lee also mentions the influence of the opinions of other people; if they find that other people around them adopted techn, they are more likely to do it too [CETL: peers, senior peers, facilitator, faculty etc.; our group was pilot so did not have this influence group ] (Lee Ming-Chi 2010)
Chiu and Wang (2008) Results: performance expectancy (usefulness) and utility – same effect on continuance
Chiu and Wang (2008) Performance expectancy, effort expectancy, positive task value – likely to help users continue, intrinsic value (enjoyment) also significant
Chiu and Wang (2008) Social influence were not significant predictor of continuance [contrary to our CETL findings I think]
Diffusion theory not relevant: – not true (early adopters, early majority, late majority, ‘laggards’)
How they value social bookmarking: utility (not the social aspect – they do this in facebook & not the bookmarking aspect, they take hand-written notes or quick savelinks
What they value: discussions as it helps them with the depth
Importance of social influence – particularly strong here – see PEOPLE slide too!
Learners often lack skills in using techn to support learning
Learners display enourmous differ-s in past educ exp-s , needs and motivations; these have profound influence over their preferred strategies for using technologies.
Learners are conservative in their attitude to adoption of new technoliges. Highly infl-d by tutors and courses and expect the use of digital technologies in course contexts to have an educational rationale.
Some agile learners – true in our case!