Advertisement

Self-Direction Indicators for Evaluating the Design-Based Elearning Course with Social Software

  • Kai PataEmail author
  • Sonja Merisalo
Chapter

Abstract

This paper discusses the development of self-direction indicators for evaluating the e-learning course using students‘ self reflections with social software. Fifty five students of the international Design-based eLearning course wrote in blogs weekly self-reflections during 14 study weeks. Data were qualitatively categorized using the classification scheme of self-direction indicators. Linear Regression demonstrated the dependence of some self-direction indicators on the study weeks. Bayesian dependency modeling revealed the significant causal interrelations of the self-direction indicators, representing a system in which various types of mediators (social software tools, self-direction as a tool, and group-work as a tool) were used as possible paths for reaching individual and group goals.

Keywords

Self-direction Self-reflection Design-based learning 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was partly funded by the iCamp project (027168) under the 6th framework programme of the EU, ESF grant 7663 and MER targeted research 0130159s08.

References

  1. Attwell, G. (2007). Personal learning environments – the future of eLearning? eLearning Papers, 2. Retrieved from http://www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=8553&doclng=6. Accessed on March 10, 2009.
  2. Brockett, R. G., & Hiemstra, R. (1991). Self-direction in adult learning. Perspectives on theory, research and practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Constantinides, E., & Fountain, S. J. (2008). Web 2.0: Conceptual foundations and marketing issues. Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice, 9, 231–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.Google Scholar
  5. Fiedler, S., & Pata, K. (2009). Distributed learning environments and social software: In search for a framework of design. S. Hatzipanagos and S. Warburton (Eds.), Handbook of research on social software and developing. Community Ontologies (pp. 145–158). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  6. Gillespie, A. (2007). Social basis of self-reflection. In V. Jaan & R. Alberto (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of sociocultural psychology (pp. 678–691). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Harri-Augstein, S., & Thomas, L. (1991). Learning conversations: The self-organised way to personal and organisational growth. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Hermans, H. J. M. (1996). Voicing the self: From information processing to dialogical interchange. Psychological Bulletin, 119(1), 31–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kieslinger, B., & Pata, K. (2008). Am i alone? The competitive nature of self-reflective activities in groups and individually. Ed-Media 2008 Proceedings (pp. 6337–6342), Vienna, AACE.Google Scholar
  10. Knowles, M. (1975). Self-Directed learning. A guide for learners and teachers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall/Cambridge.Google Scholar
  11. Merisalo, S. (2009). The development of self-direction in self-reflections in an elearning course. Master thesis, Tallinn University. Retrieved from http://www.cs.tlu.ee/instituut/opilaste_tood/magistri_tood/2009_kevad/sonja_merisalo_magistritoo.pdf. Accessed on July 10, 2009.
  12. Myllymäki, P., Silander, T., Tirri, H., & Uronen, P. (2002). B-Course: A web-based tool for bayesian and causal data analysis. International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools, 11(3), 369–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ning, H., Williams, J. R., Slocum, A. H., & Sanchez, A. (2004). InkBoard – Tablet PC enabled design-oriented learning. Proceeding (428) Computers and Advanced Technology in Education. Retrieved from http://www.actapress.com/Abstract.aspx?paperId=17075. Accessed on March 10, 2009
  14. Pata, K. (2009). Modeling spaces for self-directed learning at university courses. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 12, 23–43.Google Scholar
  15. Pata, K., & Väljataga, T. (2007). Collaborating across national and institutional boundaries in higher education – the decentralized iCamp approach. In C. Montgomerie, J. Seale (Eds.), Proceedings of Ed-Media 2007, World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 353–362).Vancouver, Canada: 24–29 June, 2007. VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)Google Scholar
  16. Pressley, M. (1995). More about the development of self-regulation: Complex, long-term, and thoroughly social. Educational Psychologist, 30(4), 207–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Smith, P., & Ragan, T. J. (1999). Instructional design (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  18. Underwood, J., & Banyard, P. E. (2008). Understanding the learning space. eLearning papers, 9. Retrieved from http://www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=11937&doclng=6. Accessed on March 10, 2009.
  19. Wijnen, W. H. F. W. (2000). Towards design-based learning. Retrieved from http://w3.tue.nl/fileadmin/stu/stu_oo/doc/OGO_brochure_1_EN.pdf. Accessed on March 10, 2009.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Informatics, Tallinn UniversityTallinnEstonia
  2. 2.Helsinki Metropolia University of Applied SciencesOuluFinland

Personalised recommendations