Overseas International School Events and
eLearning
Introduction
The Indonesian school in Riyadh is
part of the Indonesian Embassy that educates students from Kindergarten to Year
12, which use three languages; Indonesian, Arabic and English. The school was
established in 1985 and has characteristics similar to public schools in
Indonesia in which curriculum, policy and finance are supported by Government
and Parents committee partnerships.
The school has 299 students and 21
employees, including one librarian and four non-teachers. The school has two
main programs for developing interactive learning strategies. The first program
is to achieve the best quality outcomes and to give opportunities for students
to continue to study at they preferred university in Saudi Arabia and or
Indonesia. Whereas students who want to go back to Indonesia before they finish
year 12, can continue to study in public school in their city of residence. The
second program is to support the school to participate in Overseas Indonesian
School Competition (OISC) and International School Exhibition in Riyadh.
The ICT facilities in this school
are 30 desktops in a computer lab, ten school laptops and eight iPads, which
are available in the library. Each classroom has a Wi-Fi connection, and one
set computer with an LCD projector. Additionally, each teacher has a personal
laptop, and all students Year 7 to Year 12 have smartphones. During class time
or structured activities devices should only be used for learning process.
The Learners
The learners are in Stage 5, Year
9, which has ten girls and ten boys, and Year 10, which has eight girls and ten
boys. Students come from different regions of Indonesia. Five students of Year
9 are new students; two from Indonesia and three from an Arabian school. There
are also four new students in Year 10, two from Indonesia and two from an
Arabian school.
It is compulsory for students to
speak Indonesian, Arabic and English. The parents of three students in Year 9
and two students in Year 10 are diplomats. For safety reasons, these students
often leave school for they need to follow their parents to travel to overseas.
All students in Stage 5 have Internet access at home, and they have strong
motivation to perform in international events and to achieve best scores in
national exam. The students are able to use software applications such as
Excel, Word, Photo Booth, PowerPoint, Publisher and Skype.
Learning Needs
In order to meet requirements of
Indonesian Embassy, government, and parents committee, the Indonesian school in
Riyadh has programs for developing interactive learning to improve the
abilities of students in communication, collaboration, creative ideas and
critical thinking to support them at international events.
Every year, the school
participates in Overseas Indonesian School Competition (OISC) and International
School Exhibition in Riyadh. At these events, students and teachers have to
perform for research exhibitions, application of technology, and represent traditional
music and Indonesian dances.
Although many of Stage 6 students
are veterans of OISC, students in Stage 5 have been chosen because students in
Stage 6 need to be focused in national exam and selection in Indonesian and
Arabian Universities. More importantly, teachers have trained to use ICT tools,
which is available at school to support interactive learning process by blended
learning strategy. The summative assessment of this program is narrow to the
level of students’ competence either individual or group to participate at OISC
events.
Instructional Models
Adlington, et al (2015) stated
that the implementations of appropriate eLearning resources are needed to
designing an effective learning process. Soto, (2013) pointed out that the most
common model that used for instructional system of eLearning is ADDIE that
consists of five phases; Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and
Evaluation. Systematically, the ADDIE
model has characteristics that the result of each step is important as foundation
for one after in the structure. Every phase of this model is made up of
different procedural steps (Sink, 2014). Although some believe that the ADDIE
model is criticized as an ineffective and inefficient framework (Bichelmeyer,
2004), Danks (2011) has stated that this model is an effective and systematic
method that can be applied as Instructional coaches.
Another model that I will explore
is Dick and Carey (DC) model. This
Instructional Design is widely known and utilized sharing common attributes in
education (Hussain & Ismail, 2008). This model used as the base line for
many models.
The components of the Dick and
Carey are; Identify Instructional Goals, Conduct Instructional Analysis,
Analyze Learners and Contexts, Write Performance Objectives, Develop Assessment
Instruments, Develop Instructional Strategy, Develop and Select Instructional
Materials, Develop and Conduct Formative Evaluation of Instruction, Revise
Instruction and Design and Conduct Summative Evaluation (Hussain & Ismail, 2008).
ADDIE model and DC model have a
number of similarities on design development processes as basic instructional
design patterns. Both models are focused on the input, the output and the
designing process. ADDIE model and DC models are emphasizing on evaluation of
success in achieving learning process or delivery formats and instructional
strategies (Sink, 2014).
Several development steps in both
models have same components of the stages. It means implementation in the ADDIE
model also scattered among the stages of DC model, as shown on Figure 1. The
assessment phase of ADDIE is divided on instructional goal, instructional
analysis and learner analysis in DC model, for instance. For these reasons, both
models can be suitable as Instructional Design to support in the OISC events.
Figure 1. Comparison of ADDIE model and DC model.
Although ADDIE model and DC model
have similar characteristics, both models are significantly different in
elements of each steps and the evaluation process. It shows that the five steps
of ADDIE have clear meaning and understanding and DC model is much more
detailed steps.
The process of ADDIE model is set
up to evaluate each fifth components and final step within two forms of
evaluation: Formative and Summative. The Formative evaluation is focuses on the
process done throughout the model, and the Summative evaluation in purpose to
give as feedback from the users.
The evaluation and revision in DC
model is throughout each step of the method in order to identify any difficulty
each phase. The final step can be use to formative evaluation and revise in
purpose to meet standard of Instructional Design.
Base on both ADDIE and DC Instructional
System Designs, the DC model shows more detail on the sub-task, but it is
firmly close to the five principle steps of ADDIE. Due to analytical nature,
this detailing can stimulate the progress of Instructional System Design in
many aspects of learning activities (Clark, 2004).
Some advantages of DC model as
Burgess (2013) stated that this model is flexible, goal oriented, focus on the
ability of learners and performance objectives. It appears to me that in
learning environment at Indonesian school in Riyadh, DC model would be
appropriate to expose a constructivism to help Stage 5 students to create their
own meaning, accomplish objectives, and promoting problem solving from multiple
learning perspectives (Chang, 2006). Furthermore, flexibility of DC model allow
in more personalization of the learning design to suit the smaller demographic
of learners (Clark, 2004).
Interactions
Learner - Instructor
Interaction, both learner and
instructor, are similar to the classical learning approach. The instructor is
crucial and has strong developmental step as guidance and mediation in learning
activities to covers the complete process of Instructional Design from start to
finish. It was expressed by Passerini & Granger (2000) that DC model
consists of a series of events in which the instructor establish the learning
objectives, create the instructional strategy to accomplish the objectives and
the learner will follow it.
The instructor could be teachers,
and professionals from Indonesia or Stage 6 students that are veterans of OISC,
as additional sources. Hirumi (2013) stated that these interactions involve
setting and confirming the eLearning outcomes, two-way traffics communication,
providing feedback to initiate and facilitate discussion in purpose to reach
the learner needs. The eLearning environments that support OISC and
International Events should give chances for the instructor to have interaction
intensively with students. The inter-relationship would be focused on context,
content and learning instruction both online and offline. It is necessary for
both instructor and learner to identify goals and objectives, as seen on Table
1. The OISC and International events require the students to be able to develop
their skills or knowledge and the instructor can evaluate the progress of
research and application of technology, for example.
Table 1: Interactions the Learning
Context and chosen design model
Interaction Type
|
Description of Interaction
|
Dick and Carey
|
Learner-Instructor
|
Both online and offline
face-to-face interactions. Instructor can interacts with the learner by
initiate and facilitate discussion classical and online presentation. Two way
traffic communication and providing feedback. Guidance and mediation in
learning activities.
|
Describe what the learner
should perform. Identify goals and objectives. Complete instructional
analysis. Write performance objectives.
Develop instructional
strategy and revise instruction. Design and conduct Formative and Summative
Evaluation.
|
Learner-Learner
|
Collaboration among
learners. Working in-group activities on application of technology project.
Provides learners collaboratively to practice to play traditional music,
dances and languages.
|
Provide structure that
students can build on. Gain to performance objectives. Ensure the learner
meet the necessary prerequisites for performing new skills.
|
Learner-Other
|
Share and search
information from veteran OISC or Students Stage 6. Learners can explore the experience
from experts or professionals in Indonesia use global media.
|
Develop and select
instructional material. Reuse existing material whenever possible. Develop
instructional strategy and revise instruction.
|
Learner-Content
|
Encourages students to
use English and Arabic to communicate in-group, class and chat to their
upgrade their level of competence in oral and written. Demonstrate or perform
their ability to play music, dances and presentation of the science project.
|
Identify the exact
performance gap between the present performance and the desired performance.
Identify goals and objectives. Complete instructional analysis. Write
performance objectives.
Develop instructional
strategy and revise instruction.
|
Learner-Tool
|
Provides facility and
mediation of interactions on Facebook or YouTube that used as digital
pedagogy.
|
Provide structure that
students can build on Identify the learner’s progress. Develop and reinforce
the skills and knowledge formulated in the performance objectives.
|
Learner – Learner
The Instructional Design should be
constructed to facilitate multiple communications both offline and online among
learners. Barret, (as cited on McIntosh, 2013) stated that students could have
opportunities to get involved on design process.
All students need to feel as part
of group. It is important for five new students in Stage 5 who need to be able
to speak English and Arabic and work together in-group presentation. They might
work on their own, but they share goals. Students can have the ability to
express, ability to compete and support, and be supported by other learners
(Gutierrez, 2014).
Students could have chance to
create interactive learning, as cited on Brown (2008), to think like designer
who creates solution to expand products, services and process. Learner-Learner
interactions allow students to construct knowledge and apply new skills
(Hirumi, 2013). Students need to practice to work individually or in-group to
show their creativities in purpose to performance in the OISC and International
events. In this regard, Instructor stands as facilitator and mediator in learning
activities, and can give feedback directly on students’ achievement.
Learner – Content
DC model was chosen as
Instructional System Design in purpose to fulfill OISC and International events
requirements. This is a challenge for students in Stage 5 to be able to
performance at those events both for teams and individuals.
The content needs to be relevant,
useful, practical, comprehensive, organized and engaging (Gutierrez, 2014). Every
year, those events have different theme such as, water, environment, simple
technology and so on.
DC model should be useful and
relevant to design content and learning materials to support the students need.
The content need to be dispensed and comprehensive in every task to meet
student expectations to perform to those events. I firmly believe that DC model
is flexible to accommodate student needs and motivates them to apply new
knowledge (Hirumi, 2013).
It also possible to make changes if
something is not working effectively. The content of learning activities should
be narrow in the models of representation by written, verbal, visual, embodied
and 3D models, as shown on Table 2.
Table 2. Presentation models in OISC and International events.
Mode of representation
|
Demonstrated in
|
Digital technology/ software & activity
(Example of)
|
Written
|
Text
Worksheet:
Assignment:
Projects
|
Words
Paper
Performance, Facebook and
YouTube
Words
Web search for
information
|
Verbal
|
Oral presentation
|
Video recording and power
point
|
Visual
|
Drawings
Diagrams
Concepts
Maps
Animation
Presentation
|
Digital camera to capture
photos
Graphics
Inspiration
Learner and Instructor
ideas
Simulated experience work
Power point, music and
dances, science project
|
Embodied
|
Experiment work
Modelling
|
Words for text, digital
camera, recorder
Logo or sign
|
3D models
|
Models (Visual)
|
Science project, Movie
Facebook and YouTube
|
Learner - Tool
Based on classification of learner
needs for OISC and International events, DC model could be used to develop an
appropriate eLearning tools solution. Also included is a guide to help learners
consider the content and effectively of digital pedagogy. Kanuka (2006) stated
that connections of these two domains should not be neglected.
The capabilities of eLearning tool
that need to be used for those events should be considered to learning context, the interactions between learner-instructor,
learner-content, learner-tool and learner-learner. There are two mains digital
pedagogies that could be applicable in this context.
1. Facebook
Popularity of Facebook can be use
as eLearning tool for Stage 5 students because all of them have an access for
it. Using combination face –to-face with Facebook approach in eLearning process
can be constructed to accommodate student preferences for improving their
abilities.
Students can practice how to
express their ideas on group discussions in which they have difficulties to
express it face-to-face, for instance. We construct to the technology, and the
technology also constructs us (Schultz, 2015).
As well as digital media on
Facebook, students are able to share information in written form such as on group
chat, and with other media types, such as pictures and videos. Students and
Instructors can take opportunities to get involve in these programs. It means
all the learners engage in the activity and more active to produce the culture
(Jenkins, et al 2009).
The evidence shows that the
advantages of using Facebook are;
(1) From their own news feeds,
students could check updates, reminders, request and notification regularly on
the Facebook Wall.
(2) They could submit assignments
or their critical response on the forum by Facebook Discussion board.
(3) Students and instructor could
post question, ideas or link to some sites by Facebook wall page at anytime.
(4) Students and instructor have
opportunities to post images and videos. It has been shown that Facebook kept
all the students ‘in touch’ due to activities (Cover, 2014).
2. MissionV
MissionV was chiefly aimed at inspiring and engaging those
children at risk of significantly underachieving. It achieved this through
“providing a highly creative, totally immersive, game based learning
environment,” that helps students to become “original digital creators with 3D
modeling and programming skills” thereby enabling them to “connect, create and
collaborate in a 3D world entirely of their own making” (MissionV Website,
2015).
It can give opportunities to student thorough understanding with
better information retention, commitment to tasks beyond school time, increased
motivation through affective feedback, peer acceptance and interaction with
struggling students, and adaptability of the technology to suit a range of student
abilities (Galvin & Burke, 2012). The program also fostered peer teaching
between students, which provided opportunities for reflection and created a
learning community within the classrooms.
The pedagogical flexibility of the MissionV system means that
the program can be applied to a range of different contexts. It has met with
the characteristics of the DC model; which is flexible, goal
oriented, focused on the ability of learners and performance objectives. While the website
advertises its key role in teaching STEM (Science, Technology, Education &
Maths) subjects, I am confident that the technology could be adapted to suit
the social sciences very easily, particularly OISC and International events.
The MissionV program is now available for schools and will
continue to be supported by increases in Virtual Reality technology, which is
only a few months away from being mainstream marketed. However, I
believe that variations of learning tools are essential for improving
knowledge. It needs strategy to design an instructional system in learning
activities have become active, interactive, fun and valuable.
References
Adlington, R., Nader, T., &
Parkes, M. (2015). Unit 426 Foundation
of eLearning, Topic 1 –
Bichelmeyer, B. (2005). “The ADDIE
Model” – A Metaphor for the Lack of Clarity in the field of IDT.
Brown, T. (2008). Design Thinking.
Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from
Burgess, M. (2013). Dick &
Carey Systems Model of Instructional Design. Retrieved from
Chang, S. (2006). The Systematic
Design of Instruction. Educational
Technology Research &
Development, 54(4),
417-420 Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11423-006-9606-0#page-1
Clark, D. (2004). The Dick and
Carey Model. Retrieved from
Cover, R. (2014). Separating Work
and Play: Privacy, Anonymity and the Politics of Interactive
Pedagogy
in Deploying Facebook in Learning and Teaching. Digital Culture & Education, 6(1), 47-59. Retrieved from http://www.digitalcultureandeducation.com/volume-6/separating-work-and-play-privacy-anonymity-and-the-politics-of-interactive-pedagogy-in-deploying-facebook-in-learning-and-teaching/
Danks, S. (2011). The ADDIE Model:
designing, Evaluating Instructional Coach Effectiveness. ASQ,
4(5), 1-6.
Retrieved from http://rube.asq.org/edu/2011/09/process-management/the-addie-model-designing-evaluating-instructional-coach-effectiveness.pdf
Galvin, C., & Burke, I.
(2012). MissionV Schools Pilot Programme. Retrieved from
Gutierrez, K. (2014). Targeting 6
Social Learning Needs in eLearning Environments. Retrieved from
Hirumi, A. (2013). Three levels of
planned eLearning interactions: A Framework for Grounding
Research
and the Design of eLearning Programs. Quarterly
Review of Distance Education, 14(1). Retrieved from http://www.readperiodicals.com/201304/3009689871.html#ixzz2e0N0JyF8
Hussain, R., & Ismail, A.
(2008). Fitting Instructional System Design Models with WBLE Planning: The
Case
of Dick, Carey & Carey Model. Retrieved from http://eprints.um.edu.my/9365/1/Fitting_instructional_systems.pdf
Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R.,
Weigel, M., Clinton, K., & Robison, A. J. (2009). Confronting the
Challenges
of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. Massachusetts:
The MIT Press
Kanuka, H. (2006). Instructional
Design eLearning: A Discussion of Pedagogical Content Knowledge as
Missing
Construct. E-Journal of Instructional Science and Technology 9(2) 1-17.
Retrieved from
McIntosh, E. (2013, August 26).
Design Thinking. Retrieved from
http://notosh.com/lab/design-thinking-synthesis-hexagonal-thinking/
Passerini, K., & Granger, M.J.
(2000). A Developmental Model for Distance Learning Using the
Internet.
Computer & Education 34(2000),
1-15. Retrieved from
https://www.tlu.ee/~kpata/haridustehnoloogiaTLU/elearningdesignmodels.pdf
Schultz, U. (2015, April 23). How
Social Media Shapes Identity [Video files] Retrieved from
Sink, D. (2014). Design Models and
Learning Theories for Adult. Retrieved from
Soto, V. (2013).
Which instructional design models are educators using to design virtual world
instruction. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(3),
364-75.
No comments:
Post a Comment