Interactive Learning in Smart Learning Ecosystems

  • Irene Merdian
  • Gabriela Tullius
  • Peter Hertkorn
  • Oliver Burgert
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 95)

Abstract

The increasing heterogeneity of students at German Universities of Applied Sciences and the growing importance of digitalization call for a rethinking of teaching and learning within higher education. In the next years, changing the learning ecosystem by developing and reflecting upon new teaching and learning techniques using methods of digitalization will be both – most relevant and very challenging. The following article introduces two different learning scenarios, which exemplify the implementation of new educational models that allow discontinuity of time and place, technology and process in teaching and learning. Within a Blended Learning approach, the first learning scenario aims at adapting and individualizing the knowledge transfer in the course Foundations of Computer Science by providing knowledge individually and situation-specifically. The second learning scenario proposes a web-based tool to facilitate digital learning environments and thus digital learning communities and the possibility of computer-supported learning. The overall aim of both learning scenarios is to enhance learning for diverse groups by providing a different smart learning ecosystem in stepping away from a teacher-based to a student-centered approach. Both learning scenarios exemplarily represent the educational vision of Reutlingen University – its development into an Interactive University.

Keywords

E-learning Interactive University Learning methods 

Notes

Acknowledgments

“Curriculum 4.0” is funded by Stifterverband and Carl-Zeiss-Foundation.

References

  1. 1.
    Dräger, J., Ziegele, F.: Hochschulbildung wird zum Normalfall. Ein gesellschaftlicher Wandel und seine Folgen. CHE, Centrum für Hochschulentwicklung gGmbH. Gütersloh (2014). Accessed 14 Feb 2018Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Hall Giesinger, C., Ananthanarayanan, V.: NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education. The New Media Consortium, Austin (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kahiigi Kigozi, E., Ekenberg, L., Hansson, H., Tusubira, F.F., Danielson, M.: Exploring the e-learning state of art. Electr. J. e-Learn. 6(2), 77–88 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pomerantz, J., Brown, M., Brooks, D.C.: Foundations for a next generation digital learning environment: faculty, students, and the LMS. Research report. ECAR, Louisville, CO (2018). https://library.educause.edu/~/media/files/library/2018/1/ers1801.pdf. Accessed 14 Feb 2018
  5. 5.
    Bandura, A.: Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood’s Cliffs (1986)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zimmermann, B.: A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. J. Educ. Psychol. 81(3), 329–339 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Himpels-Gutermann, K.: Selbstlernphasen und E-Learning. In: Armbrost-Weihs, K., Böckelmann, C., Halbeis, W.: Selbstbestimmt lernen – Selbstarrangements gestalten. Innovationen für Studiengänge und Lehrveranstaltungen mit kostbarer Präsenzzeit, pp. 103–116. Waxmann, Münster (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Benz, B.F.: Improving the Quality of E-Learning by Enhancing Self-Regulated Learning. A Synthesis of Research on Self-Regulated Learning and an Implementation of a Scaffolding Concept. Technische Universität, Darmstadt [Dissertation] (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Donker, A., de Boer, H., Kostons, D., Dignath-van Ewijk, C., van der Werf, M.: Effectiveness of self-regulated learning strategies on academic performance: a meta-analysis. In: Educational Research Review, pp. 1–26 (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Würffel, N.: Gestaltung von Selbstlernphasen in Blended-Learning Kursen. Was gilt es zu bedenken? In: Armbrost-Weihs, K., Böckelmann, C., Halbeis, W.: Selbstbestimmt lernen – Selbstarrangements gestalten. Innovationen für Studiengänge und Lehrveranstaltungen mit kostbarer Präsenzzeit, pp. 125–134. Waxmann, Münster (2017)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gerholz, K.-H.: Der Weg zu selbstregulierten Lernen als didaktische Herausforderung. In: Armbrost-Weihs, K., Böckelmann, C., Halbeis, W.: Selbstbestimmt lernen – Selbstarrangements gestalten. Innovationen für Studiengänge und Lehrveranstaltungen mit kostbarer Präsenzzeit, pp. 27–38. Waxmann, Münster (2017)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Etzioni, A., Etzioni, O.: Face-to-face and computer-mediated communities, comparative analysis. Inf. Soc. 15(4), 241–248 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Johansen, R.: Groupware: Computer Support for Business Teams. The Free Press, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Allmendinger, K., Kempf, F., Hamann, K.: Collaborative learning in virtual classroom scenarios. In: Cress, U., Dimitrova, V., Specht, M. (eds.) Learning in the Synergy of Multiple Disciplines. EC-TEL 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5794. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Irene Merdian
    • 1
  • Gabriela Tullius
    • 1
  • Peter Hertkorn
    • 1
  • Oliver Burgert
    • 1
  1. 1.Reutlingen UniversityReutlingenGermany

Personalised recommendations