1 learning support by mobile technologies on gees fieldwork dr stuart downward and dr timothy linsey...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Learning support by mobile technologies
on GEES fieldwork
Dr Stuart Downward and Dr Timothy Linsey
Kingston University, UK
Dr Ann Ooms
Kingston University and St. George’s University of London, UK
GEES Subject Centre 10th Anniversary Conference, Plymouth, UK9th July 2010
2
The MORSE ProjectMobilizing Remote Student EngagementFunded by JISC
Kingston University
De Montford University
GGEs fieldwork (School of Geography,
Geology and the Environment)
Student placements
(School of Health and Life Sciences)
Collaborative experiences
3
GEES students occupy multiple learning spaces…
4
Fieldwork is an essential and integral component of GEES learning and teaching
5
Challenge – to integrate the experiences acquired in different geographical spaces
6
Blending learning-spaces
The field The laboratory
Personal workplaceSeminar room
Online/VLE
Lecture theatre
Adapted from Downward et al, 2008.
Achieved with recorded information: guides, notebooks, podcasts.
Recorded information is asynchronous Students producing a Podcast in SE Spain
7
Mobile technologies provide the opportunity to blend learning spaces ‘live’, in real time, synchronous learning
8
Research QuestionsDoes the use of mobile technologies improve student fieldwork experiences in terms of
• Collaboration with peers?
• Communication with lecturers?
• Rapid feedback?
• Comprehension of the fieldwork phenomenon?
Does the staff use of mobile technologies improve the efficiency of fieldwork organization and implementation?
9
MethodologyMixed methods
Students: questionnaires , focus groups and reflective journals
Lecturers: focus groups and interviews
Student mentors: focus groups and interviews
Researcher’s observations
10
Scenarios3 dimensions:
(1)different field-sites/student cohorts,
(2)different intervention models,
(3)different communication scenarios
11
Isle of Wight (Oct 2008, 2009) Malta (Jun 2009, 2010)
Morocco (Jan 2009, 2010) Spain (April 2009, 2010) Dubai (Nov 2009)
1. Different field-sites, different cohorts and Levels, different learning objectives
12
2. Different intervention models
Non-interventional:
hands-off observation of students and staff using technology.
Semi-interventional:
guidance for students and lecturers to use technology.
Fully-interventional:
training and hands-on support provided in the use of technologies before and during the fieldwork. Monitoring guidance and training provided by GEES lecturers, MoRSE staff and student mentors.
13
3. Different communication scenarios
A: students in the field and lecturer/s at University
B: students at University and Lecturer in the field
C: students in the field and lecturers in the field
D: students in the field and other students in the field
E: students in the field and other students at university (not tested)
14
Results scenario A: students in field, lecturers at University
Isle of Wight
Saint Helen’s, Isle of Wight
2008
Year 1 students
Non-interventional
Technology: Texttools
Students receive paper handout of instructions
2009
Year 1 students
Semi-interventional
Technology: Texttools
Students receive pre-exercise explanation by lecturer
15
Results scenario A: students in field, lecturers at University
Lecturer
Not many questions from students
The use of texttools was perceived as moderate
Little difference was noticed between 2008 and 2009
Lessons learned
Preparation is essential – visit site prior to students
Have information available at finger tips
Lecturer used two laptops (one for texttools and one for internet browsing), maps, pictures
16
Results scenario A: students in field, lecturers at University
Percentage of students who (somewhat) agreed that SMS
2009 2010
was easy to use 64.3 94.4
made the fieldtrip more enjoyable 77.5 77.8
made me interact with my peers 47.5 66.7
helped me to get to know my peers
40.0 61.1
will have a positive impact on my motivation to study
72.5 72.2
17
Results scenario A: students in field, lecturers at University
18
Results scenario A: students in field, lecturers at University
Percentage of students who (somewhat) agreed that SMS
2009 2010
Would advise my lecturer to keep using sms
91.3 88.2
Would like other lecturers to use sms
89.1 88.2
Was a positive experience overall
93.2 82.3
Results scenario A: students in field, lecturers at University
• Several students reported not having received a response or not in a time
• One students asked if all questions and answers could be posted on BlackBoard
• “I would have liked to be cc-ed on all texts”• “I think it is too unpersonal. It is nicer if you
can just speak to a person but it might be a substitute if the person is definitely not available otherwise”
19
20
Results scenario B: students at University, lecturer in the field
Dubai, International Desalination Association World Congress
2009
Year 3 and MSc students on modules Water Resources Management
Semi-interventional
Lecturer used blog site to post notes while he was attending the conference
Students comment, invited to ask questions they have indirect access to the conference
Not strictly synchronous
21
Results scenario B: students at University, lecturer in the field
Findings
Only a small number of students engaged and got involved
Those who engaged responded very positive about the experience
Needs to be further investigated
22
Results scenario C: students in field, lecturer in the field
Spain
2009
Year 2*
Semi-interventional
2010
Year 2
Fully-interventional
Student mentors
Morocco
2009
Year 3
Non-interventional
2010
Year 3*
Semi-interventional
Malta
2009
Year 2
Semi-interventional
2010
Fully-interventional
Student mentors
* Comprises the same student cohorts as 2009
23
Results scenario C: students in field, lecturer in the field
• Internet access was used to: (from most to least)
– communicate with friends and family– help with field trip assignment– help with other assignments not related to this module– communicate with peers, lecturers
• Internet access was perceived as essential
24
Results scenario C: students in field, lecturer in the field
• SMS was not used much by students because they had face-to-face access to lectures and peers in the evenings
• “The SMS supported the interactions fully, however waiting for a reply can be tedious especially if the answer is needed to complete the work”
• “I like the fact that we were given the opportunity to learn to use different technologies in different situations and that I now can make decisions on which one to use based on my own experience”
25
Malta: students engaged in group project work
Golden Bay, Malta, 2010
2009
Year 2 students
Non-interventional
Technology: Mobile phones
2010
Year 2 students
Fully-interventional
Technology: Mobile phones, fieldwork blog.
In-field student mentor support
Students receive pre-exercise explanation by lecturer
Results scenario D: students in field, other students in the field
26
“The site gave us the opportunity to share pictures and videos which is important for those who did not have digital cameras or in case of a missed photo opportunity”
“The use of technologies supported the theoretical knowledge I already had”
“The use of technologies both supported and hindered my learning. Every day I felt I had to sue the cam to record activities, try to twitter about things where possible, and use texttools to communicate with lecturers or peers but using all the unfamiliar technologies together with GIS devices was not possible in short time”
Results scenario D: students in field, other students in the field
27
Conclusions
Students have mobile technologies and they feel comfortable bringing them along on field trips
Use of technology by students seemed to have increased since 2009
Students use technologies in daily life but not really to assist their learning or assist them with their assignments – they need to be guided
Students see the benefit and value the opportunities provided to them by the lecturers
Lecturers see the benefit of using technologies for field trips
The participation of mentors on the field trip is beneficial for all involved (students, lecturers and mentors)
28
Quotes from Students
“I think the technologies I used and the way I used them helped my learning; in conjunction with other research they will give a broader and fuller picture of an environment”
“I understand and can use the technologies now”
“I think technologies are good but avoid over use. Use your own physical senses and common sense to make observations to. However technologies can help build a more accurate picture.”
29
Quotes from Students
“Some lecturers don’t know much about technology and we are quite fortunate that Stuart was up-to-date with this kind of stuff. But then in a way I think some lecturers can overdose on the technology, they think oh we’ll have a blog, we’ll have a forum, we’ll have a this, we’ll have a that but what is the point if it is not used? But we are learning and I suppose they want to show us the ways we can use technologies in our future work, this is the idea, you don’t have to use it but you might find it helpful in your future work”
30
Reflections on Methodology• Researcher attended field trips
– Improved data collection (focus groups, interviews– Observations
• Mentors– Also assisted in data collection (run the focus groups)
• Reflective journal with flip cameras– Few students engaged but superficial reflection– Students did not like the video aspect – preferred just audio
• Challenging to motivate students to complete online questionnaires
• Time is limited during field trips for students to participate in focus groups/interviews – needs to be carefully planned
31
References
Downward, S.R., Livingstone, D., Lynch, K. and Mount, N (2008) Podcasting to support fieldwork teaching and learning in geography, environmental and earth sciences (GEES). Podcasting for Learning in Universities, Salmon, G and Edhirisinga, P (eds), Open University Press.
Contact information
Stuart Downward: [email protected]
Tim Linsey: [email protected]
Ann Ooms: [email protected]