A Process-Oriented Model for Technology-Enhanced Learning

  • Philip Bonanno
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 73)

Abstract

A process-oriented model is developed to underpin the initiatives in technology-enhanced learning currently introduced in the Faculty of Education, University of Malta. The need for such initiatives is highlighted considering the educational, economical and social needs of the country. These needs demand a technology-intensive, flexible, learner-oriented approach to education and training. More important they need to be based on an innovative methodology that focuses on learning processes and interactions rather than subject content only. Based on recommendations from different fields of research a process-oriented approach is proposed that considers dimensions and levels of interactions. Interactions are categorized along the domain, technology and community dimensions and across three pedagogical levels – novice, competent and expert learners each having characteristic learning needs. The model is used to develop a programme in TEL integrating epistemology, pedagogy, design principles with use of digital tools.

Keywords

Technology-enhanced learning Pedagogical models Process-oriented methodologies Post-graduate studies Course design course evaluation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    The Stellenbosch Declaration - ICT in Education: Make It Work. International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP) World Conference on Computers in Education (WCCE). University of Stellenbosh, South Africa (July 2005), http://www.terry-freedman.org.uk/artman/uploads/thestellenboschdeclaration.pdf
  2. 2.
    Salomon, G., Perkins, D.N.: Individual and Social Aspects of Learning. Review of Research in Education 23, 1–24 (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Collis, B., Moonen, J.: Flexible Learning in a Digital World: Experiences and Expectations. Kogan Page, UK (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chowcat, J., Phillips, B., Popham, J., Jones, I.: Research Report in the Leading Next Generation Learning series. Harnessing Technology Review 2008: The role of technology and its impact on Education (Full report) BECTA, November 2008 (2008b)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bereiter, C.: Education and Mind in the Knowledge Age. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Popper, K.R.: Objective knowledge: An evolutionary approach. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1972)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Frith, C.D., Wolpert, D.M.: Decoding, imitating and influencing the actions of others: the mechanisms of social interaction. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences 358(1431), 431–434 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bronfenbrenner, U.: Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist 32, 513–531 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., O’Malley, C.: The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In: Spada, E., Reiman, P. (eds.) Learning in Humans and Machine: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science, pp. 189–211. Elsevier, Oxford (1996)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Alexander, P.A., Murphy, P.K.: Learner Profiles: Valuing Individual Differences Within Classroom Communities. In: Ackerman, P.L., Kyllonen, P.C., Roberts, R.D. (eds.) Learning and Individual Differences: Process, Trait, and Content Determinants. American Psychological Association, Washington (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vygotsky, L.S.: Mind in Society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1978)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philip Bonanno
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Educational Technology, Research and Innovation, Faculty of EducationUniversity of Malta

Personalised recommendations