Advertisement

Conceptualization of Multimodal and Distributed Designs for Learning

  • N. Staffan Selander
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Educational Technology book series (LNET)

Abstract

In this chapter, we will focus on articulations of teaching and learning and relate these to technological shifts and social paradigms. We will briefly describe the changes of technology of learning from SYSTEM 1, which is characterized by rather stable structures, national curricula, classroom teaching, printed school textbooks, and assessment standards (developed during 1945–2000), to SYSTEM 2, which is characterized by dynamic (global) change, the development of digitized media, cognitive systems, mobile learning, and the idea of individual agency (2000→). During these two periods of time, quite different teaching and learning strategies can be articulated: “designed information and teaching” versus “multimodal and distributed designs for learning.” However, most current theories of learning are still founded on theories of meaning developed in an era constituted by SYSTEM 1, and the assumptions of stable systems and the reproduction of forms, processes, and actions. Today, different kinds of platforms, tablets, games, apps, and collaborative problem-solving design have contributed to individual production, new communicative patterns, and information access to such a degree that we could say that “information is no longer the problem.” Information is ubiquitous and cheap. What is at stake is rather to connect people in meaningful communicative settings. The formation and transformation of knowledge and the role of multimodal and distributed designs for learning as a theoretical approach will then be discussed in relation to SYSTEM 2.

Keywords

Designs for learning Multimodal knowledge representations Distributed learning Transformation of knowledge Cultures of recognition Paradigmatic thinking 

References

  1. Åkerfeldt, A. (2014). Didaktisk design med digitala resurser. En studie av kunskapsrepresentioner i en digitliserad skola. Dissertation Stockholm University, Department of Education, No. 32, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  2. Åkerfeldt, A. & Selander, S. (2011) Exploring educational video game design—Meaning potentials and implications for learning. In P. Felicia (Ed.), Handbook of research on improving learning and motivation through educational games: Multidisciplinary approaches (pp. 1004–1018). Hershey: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  3. Alant, L., Engan, B., Otnes, H., Sandvik, M., & Schwebs, T. (2003). Samhandling med, foran og via skjermen. Oslo: Forsknings- og kompetansenettverk for it i utdanning Universitet i Oslo.Google Scholar
  4. Barab, S. A., Scott, B., Siyahhan, S., Goldstone, R., Ingram-Goble, A., Zuiker, S. J., & Warren, S. (2009). Transformational play as a curricular scaffold: Using videogames to support science education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(4), 305–320. doi: 10.1007/s10956-009-9171-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bergström, P. (2012). Designing for the unknown. Digital design for process-based assessments in technology-rich learning environments. Dissertation Umeå University, Department of Applied Educational Science, Umeå.Google Scholar
  6. Björklund Boistrup, L. (2010). Assessment discourses in the mathematics classroom. A multimodal social semiotic study. Department of Mathematics Education, Stockholm University, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  7. Bos, B., Wilder, L., Cook, M., & O’Donnel, R. (2014). Learning mathematics through minecraft? Teaching Children Mathematics, 21(1), 56–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bourdieu, P. & Passeron, J. C. (1977) Reproduction, in education, society and culture. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  9. Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  10. Deleuze, G. (2001). Difference and repetition. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  11. Egenfeldt-Nielsen, S., Meyer, B., & Sørensen, B. H. (2011). Serious games in education. A global perspective. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Eliasson, J. (2013). Tools for designing mobile interaction with the physical environment in outdoor lessons. Dissertation, Stockholm University, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  13. Elm Fristorp, A. (2012). Design för lärande – barns meningsskapande i naturvetenskap. Dissertation. Department of Education, No. 12. Stockholm University, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  14. Gee, J. P. (2004). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  15. Gee, J. P. & Shaffer, D.W. (2010). Looking where the light is bad: Video games and the future of assessment (Epistemic Games Group Working Paper No. 2010-02). Madison: University of Wisconsin-Madison.http://edgaps.org/gaps/looking-where-the-light-is-bad/.
  16. Gibbons, M. (2002). The self-directed learning handbook: Challenging adolescent students to excel. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  17. Hämäläinen, R., Manninen, T., Järvelä, S., & Häkkinen, P. (2006). Learning to collaborate: Designing collaboration in a 3-D game environment. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(1), 47–61. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.12.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hayes, S., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (Eds.). (2001). Relational Frame Theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Plenum Press Co.Google Scholar
  19. Holm Sørensen, B., Audon, L. & Levinsen, K.T. (2011). Skole 2.0. Århus: KLIM.Google Scholar
  20. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Insulander, E., & Selander, S. (2009). Designs for learning in museum contexts. Designs for Learning, 2(2), 8–22.Google Scholar
  22. Ito, M. (2010). Hanging out, messing around and geeking out: Kids living and learning with new media. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  23. Jackson, J. R. (1959). Learning from experience in business decision games. California Management Review, 1(2), 92–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jewitt, C. (2006). Technology, literacy and learning. A multimodal approach. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Kjällander, S. (2011). Designs for learning in an extended digital environment. Case studies of social interaction in the social science classroom. Dissertation, Stockholm University, Department of Education, No 1, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  26. Koschmann, T. (1996). Paradigm shifts and instructional technology: An introduction. In T. Koschmann (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm (pp. 1–24). Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  27. Kress, G., & Selander, S. (2012). Multimodal design, learning and cultures of recognition. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(4), 265–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kress, G. R. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality. A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (2002/1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Löwgren, J., & Stolterman, E. (2004). Thoughtful interaction design. A design perspective on information technology. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  32. Miller, A. (2012). Game-based learning. Ideas for using minecraft in the classroom. Retrieved February 17, 2015, from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/minecraft-in-classroom-andrew-miller
  33. Nouri, J. (2014). Orchestrating scaffolded outdoor mobile learning activities. Dissertation, Stockholm University, Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Research Report 14-014, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  34. Papert, S. (1998). Does easy do it? Children, games, and learning. Game Developer, 5(6), 88.Google Scholar
  35. Piaget, J. (1992). The child’s conception of the world. Lanham, Maryland: Littlefield Adams Quality Paperbacks. [Representation du monde chez l’enfant, 1929].Google Scholar
  36. Ramberg, R., Artman, H., & Karlgren, K. (2013). Designing learning opportunities in interaction design: Interactionaries as a means to study and teach student design processes. Designs for Learning, 6(1–2), 30–50. doi: 10.2478/dfl-2014-0015.Google Scholar
  37. Ricœur, P. (1983). Temps et récit. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
  38. Rostvall, A. L & Selander, S. (Eds.) (2008). Design för lärande. Norstedts Akademiska Förlag.Google Scholar
  39. Säljö, R. (2005). Lärande och kulturella redskap: om lärprocesser och det kollektiva minnet. Stockholm: Norstedts akademiska förlag.Google Scholar
  40. Selander, S. & Kress, G. (2010). Design för lärande – ett multimodalt perspektiv. Stockholm: Norstedts. [In Danish 2012: Læringsdesign. Copenhagen: Frydenlund].Google Scholar
  41. Selander, S. (2008a). Designs for learning—A theoretical perspective. Designs for Learning, 1(1), 10–22.Google Scholar
  42. Selander, S. (2008b). Designs for learning and the formation and transformation of knowledge in an era of globalization. Studies in Philosophy of Education, 27, s. 267–281.Google Scholar
  43. Selander, S. (2008c). Designs for learning and ludic engagement. Digital Creativity, 19(3), 199–208. doi: 10.1080/14626260802312673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shannon, C. & Weaver, W. (1948/1998). The mathematical theory of communication. Chicago: University of Illinois.Google Scholar
  45. Shaw, E. (2014). PLAY Minecraft! Assessing secondary engineering education using game challenges within a participatory learning environment. In Proceedings of the 121 Annual Conference and Exposition, 360° of Engineering Education, paper 8438, Indianapolis, Indiana.Google Scholar
  46. Sheridan, M. P., & Rowsell, J. (2010). Design literacies. Learning and innovation in the digital age. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Skinner, B. F. (1965/1953). Science and human behavior. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  48. Skinner, B. F. (1988). About behaviorism. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  49. Squire, K. (2011). Video games and learning—Teaching participatory culture in the digital age. New York: Teacher’s College Press.Google Scholar
  50. Steinkuehler, C., Squire, K., & Barab, S. (Eds.). (2012). Games, learning, and society. Learning and meaning in the digital age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Stocklmayer, S. M., Rennie, L. J., & Gilbert, J. K. (2010). The roles of formal and informal sectors in the provision of effective science education. Studies in Science Education, 46(1), 1–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vygotskij, L. S. (2001). Tänkande och språk. Göteborg: Daidalos. [Translated from the 1934 Russian publication Myslenie i rec].Google Scholar
  53. Werler, T., & Wulf, C. (Eds.). (2006). Hidden dimensions of education. Rhetoric, rituals and anthropology. Münster/New York/München/Berlin: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  54. Wertsch, J. V. (1997/1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Wiklund, M. & Ekenberg, L. (2009). Going to school in World of Warcraft. Observations from a trial programme using off-the-shelf computer games as learning tools in secondary education. Designs for learning, 1(2), 36–56.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer and Systems SciencesStockholm UniversityKistaSweden
  2. 2.StockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations