employing patterns for web-based person-centered leraning - concept and first experiencies

8/13/2019 Employing Patterns for Web-based Person-centered Leraning - Concept and First Experiencies

1/8

Employing Patterns for Web-Based, Person-Centered Learning:

Concept and First Experiences

Michael Derntl, Renate Motschnig-PitrikDepartment of Computer Science and Business Informatics

University of Vienna

Austria

[email protected], [email protected]

Abstract:Current learning theories tend to exploit the potentials of web-based technologies tosupport the learners in constructing pragmatic and persistent knowledge. To reduce the effortof introducing Person-Centered e-Learning in courses, we investigate the use of patterns toallow for the reuse of successful and effective e-Learning practices. Drawing on recent

developments in the pattern movement, this paper introduces a family of related patterns,shows their application in a PhD students seminar, discusses our first experiences, and points

to areas of further research.

Introduction

Learning theories are constantly subject to change. Today, it has been widely recognized that pure transfer of

information (e.g., through lecturing) does not by itself imply the construction of knowledge on the side of the

information recipient, i.e. the learner. Current advanced theories of learning take advantage of the widespread

potential of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) to support learners in constructing knowledge

(Schank 1997; Salmon 2000; McConnell 2000, 2002). The enrichment of learning processes by means of ICT

and new media is one important aspect of e-Learning. However, the use of ICT per se rarely leads to deeper

learning processes and to time saving. Instead, research has to be done to investigate how to change the quality

of the time spent with students in order to induce deeper learning processes. We observe that if pure transfer of

information is deferred to the Internet, additional time resources are set free. These can be used in face-to-face

sessions to spend more effort on facilitating those aspects of the learning process that lead to construction of

practical and persistent knowledge in the learner (Motschnig-Pitrik 2001, 2002). This is the main hypothesis

underlying Person-Centered e-Learning, which aims to effectively enrich the Person-Centered Approach to

teaching and learning (Rogers 1983) by elements of e-Learning.

Our experience (Motschnig-Pitrik 2001) has shown that introducing Person-Centered e-Learning is more

demanding with respect to time and provision of resources than conventional teaching. Thus we started to

capture and to reuse successful and effective Person-Centered e-Learning scenarios (Derntl & Motschnig-Pitrik

2003). For this enterprise we have adapted the pattern approach, which was initially developed by Alexander

(1977) in the field of architecture to capture what he considered as the timeless way of building (Alexander

1979). A pattern abstractly describes the core of the solution to a problem that is frequently recurring within a

specific context. In this way a pattern allows for the reuse of well-proven practices.

In using patterns to enable the reuse of Person-Centered e-Learning practices, a particularly interesting aspectarises regarding the role of web-based e-Learning platforms, because the abstract models of patterns can be

mapped to collections of interactive web pages. In this way, they directly support the organizational workflows

of courses and thus free the facilitator from several routine activities like disseminating material, keeping track

of timely submission of documents, and other resource-consuming tasks.

This paper outlines the main principles of employing the pattern approach to Person-Centered e-Learning and

presents first experiences in applying a family of patterns in a PhD students literature seminar at the University

of Vienna. It is organized as follows: In the first part we outline the didactic basics and central hypotheses of


2/8

Person-Centered e-Learning. Subsequently, after introducing the pattern approach in general, the specific

approach to capturing and utilizing patterns of learning scenarios in a literature seminar is presented. Finally,

we reflect on our experiences, draw conclusions, and give an outlook on further research.

Person-Centered e-Learning The Didactic Baseline

Todays steadily growing complexity and intertwining of data, processes, and knowledge by far outreaches an

individuals capacity of knowing. Thus individual, intellectual knowledge needs to be supplemented by social

skills and general problem-solving capabilities. Rapidly increasing amounts of information and improved,

inexpensive world-wide connectedness make a whole-person approach to learning including interpersonal

values, communication skills, and internal flexibility more essential than ever before. It are precisely these

properties and attitudes that Carl Rogers, Americas most influential psychologist of the previous century, sees

as the targets of personal development (Rogers 1961). Rogers and his colleagues researched and specified the

conditions under which human beings tend to move towards flexibility, acceptance of self and others, self-

confidence, integrity, creativity and capabilities to deal with the problems of life more effectively. These

necessary and sufficient conditions, which have to be held or lived by the facilitator, and reciprocally be

perceived by the students, are characterized as follows (Rogers 1983, p. 121-126):

Realness in the facilitator means that he or she must be real in the relationship with the student, be theperson he/she is and not use any masks or facades in communicating with the students.

Acceptance or respect towards student implies that the facilitator accepts and respects the wholepersonality of the student and feels basic trust in his or her constructive tendency, his/her striving for

solutions in his/her own way.

Empathic understandingmeans that the facilitator actively listens to the students with the ultimate goal todeeply understand their questions, motivations, intentions, and the meanings of their communication as

well as solutions.

Extensive empirical research has been conducted to prove the benefits of the Person-Centered Approach to

teaching and learning in educational environments (Aspy 1972; Rogers 1983; Rogers & Freiberg 1994) and in

organizations (Ryback 1998). Person-Centered e-Learning predominantly draws upon Rogerss and his

colleagues findings, yet strengthens these by evidence from a cognitive neuroscience point of view

(Motschnig-Pitrik & Nykl 2002), and from the perspective of social learning (Wenger 1998; McConnell 2002).

While the benefits of "pure" person-centered learning have been proved in numerous studies and are thoroughlydocumented in the literature (Rogers 1983; Baxter & Gray 2001; Gamboa et al. 2001), its combination with

elements of e-Learning is a novel asset (Motschnig-Pitrik 2001, 2002; Motschnig-Pitrik & Holzinger 2002;

Motschnig-Pitrik & Derntl 2002). Briefly, the enhancement is such that major parts of the transfer of cognitive

information conventionally the instructors task are allocated to the computer. This leaves more room for

social interaction, knowledge construction, and personal exchange in person-to-person meetings such that they

can be used to anchor knowledge to existing experiences of the learners, to the exchange of learners viewpoints

and materials, to discuss expert meanings, to apply knowledge to authentic problems, and other ways of

facilitating learning. In this way learners will be more active personally and will be able to experience working

and learning in teams that construct knowledge.

In a nutshell, Person-Centered e-Learning is driven by the belief that learning is most effective if it

encompasses personal, social, and intellectual aspects according to the three levels of learning (Motschnig &

Mallich 2002) and makes situated use of ICT taking the role of a most versatile tool.

The Pattern Approach Capturing Successful Practices

One of the most apposite and influential definitions of a pattern was coined by architect Christopher Alexander

(1979), as it conveys all central aspects of a pattern: Each pattern describes a problem which occurs over and

over again in our environment and then describes the core of the solution to that problem, in such a way that

you can use this solution a million times over without ever doing it the same way twice (p. x). In brief, the


3/8

focal point of the pattern approach is the striving for capturing proven solutions to frequently recurring

problems. As problems rarely occur isolated from each other in reality, pattern authors usually supply

combinations of patterns addressing whole problem domains or problem categories. Regarding the format of a

pattern itself, there are different approaches: while some authors prefer prose style (e.g., Alexander et al. 1977;

Fowler 1998), the majority provide structured description templates comprising named sections (e.g., Gamma et

al. 1995; Buschmann et al. 1996; Schmidt et al. 2000; Tidwell 2002).

Pattern combination concepts, depending on the method of their categorization and composition, can be

summarized as follows:

Pattern catalogs as more or less loosely interrelated complementary patterns, e.g., in the field of object-oriented software design (Gamma et al. 1993, 1995)

Pattern systems as layered and categorized collections of patterns (Buschmann et al. 1996), e.g., indistributed systems design (Schmidt et al. 2000)

Pattern languages as computationally complete pattern systems, e.g., in the field of architecture(Alexander et al. 1977)

Pattern handbooks as well-documented summaries of relevant concepts in a domain (Anderson 1993;Riehle & Zllighoven 1996)

Patterns for Person-Centered e-Learning

Our preliminary pattern repository is layered and organized into categories and different levels of detail. It

borrows significantly from Alexanders pattern language approach but as well includes aspects from the three

remaining categories given above. Currently, we have modelled more than a dozen parameterized patterns that

we have derived from our teaching activities. We have also initiated a virtual community with the primary

purpose to support the exchange of ideas and experiences among practitioners of the Person-Centered Approach

(see http://elearn.pri.univie.ac.at/pca).

Just like Alexander employed patterns to deal with the construction of towns and buildings using architectural

design and arrangement techniques, the pattern approach to Person-Centered e-Learning as presented in this

paper employs patterns for courses and course modules being composed of smaller elements such as electronic

content, knowledge construction in groups, team exercises, discussion, feedback, evaluation, and other

techniques supporting person-centered learning. This unveils yet another analogy to Alexanders patterns:

Person-Centered e-Learning patterns1aregenerative(Alexander 1979; Appleton 2000), as they tell how to build

a super-ordinate whole by combining and connecting smaller elements.

The patterns this paper presents are hierarchically organized, each of them depending on a number of related

patterns. This method of decomposition into different layers supports the reusability of widely and frequently

used scenarios, such as publishing a piece of information. The Unified Modeling Language (UML) (OMG

2001) is employed for modeling dynamic aspects of a pattern, structural relations, as well as relationships

between patterns. Dynamic behavior is modeled using UML activity diagrams, while static structures and other

diagrams showing related entities are modeled using UML static structure diagrams (aka. class diagrams).

The choice of the UML as the target modeling language is supported by a number of arguments: its

standardization, its world-wide acceptance, and its extensibility through stereotyping mechanisms (OMG 2001).

As prevalent in most pattern approaches, a structured form is used to specify the patterns. At the moment there

are 10 sections in each pattern. These sections are given in Table 1 along with the respective description.

Section Description

Pattern Name Meaningful descriptor for the pattern, capable of succinctly conveying its essence.

Intent Short statement which situation or scenario the pattern addresses.

Motivation When appropriate, shows motivation of the pattern, e.g. deficiencies of the traditional scenario.

Scenario Depending on the intent of the pattern, this section describes the desired, or otherwise

1Hereafter referred to as PCeL patterns, for the sake of brevity.


4/8

recurring scenario that characterizes the pattern.

Sequence Shows sequences of activities in the scenario, modeled as UML activity diagrams.

Structure Shows the associations and relations between entities involved in the scenario as a UML static

structure diagram.

Web Template When appropriate, shows how the patterns processes can be supported by web-based learning

platforms, in the form of prototypical user interfaces and interactions.

Classification As the core of the pattern has already been specified, this section embeds the pattern into the

network of related patterns.

Parameters This section shows the patterns values with respect to various parameters, such as number of

participants, level of expertise needed, target skills, time for preparation and provision of

resources, level of certainty about the usefulness of the pattern, and others.

Examples This final section shows examples of successfully putting the pattern into practice

Table 1: Sections of PCeL patterns.

A family of patterns applied in a PhD students literature seminar at the University of Vienna is depicted by

Figure 1, whereas the dotted arrows show interdependencies between the patterns. These patterns have emerged

from successful experiences and practices made in courses in previous terms at the Department of Computer

Science and Business Informatics at the University of Vienna.

Figure 1: Literature Seminar and related patterns.

As a detailed specification of all patterns depicted in Figure 1 would by far go beyond the scope of this paper,

the following Table 2 presents just the intent section of each pattern.

Pattern Intent

Alternating Phases Show that online phases alternate with presence phases.

Feedback Describe how the facilitator can collect valuable feedback from the participants.

Literature Seminar Offer a seminar where participants experience collaborative learning through discussion,

presentations, and interaction on the learning platform. Contrary to traditional seminars,

participants get to personally know each other, as well as their different fields of interest.

Meeting Abstractly outline the characteristics of a face-to-face meeting and its main phases.

Peer-Evaluation Present ways to incorporate peer-evaluation techniques in the grading phase.

Publish Disclosure of an item or a piece of information to a certain target person or target group.

Table 2: Intent sections excerpted from the patterns.

To give the reader a glimpse on what a pattern looks like, Figure 2 shows the main activity diagram from the

sequence section of the Literature Seminar pattern. This diagram shows two types of activities:


5/8

Ordinary activities, called action states in the UML specification (OMG 2001, Chapter 3, p. 159). Compound activities, called subactivity states in the UML specification (OMG 2001, Chapter 3, p. 160).

Graphically, these contain a small icon in the lower right corner (e.g. Preliminary Phases). Such a

compound activity usually comprises a whole lower-level pattern by linking to a subdiagram that models

the underlying sequence of activities. Each compound activity has an attached note which generally

outlines what it comprises. The use of this mechanism ensures that each patterns activity diagrams remain

clearly arranged, and do not get overloaded.

Figure 2: The Literature Seminar patterns main sequence of activities2.

Applying the Patterns First Experiences

In the previous semester, the Literature Seminar pattern as given in Figure 2, along with its dependent patterns,

has been applied in a PhD students seminar in computer science at the University of Vienna. The authentic flow

2Experienced UML practicioners might notice two things: First, areas of responsibilities in the activity diagram in Figure 2are not modeled using swimlanes. Instead, when needed the responsible role appears in the respective activitys titlefollowed by a colon. Second, decisions are modeled as questions, with the possible answers on the outgoing transitions.

Usually, decisions are captionless and the outgoing transitions carry guard conditions in square brackets. These two areadditional measures to keep the diagrams clear, and understandable even for UML novices.


6/8

of activities in the seminar as related to the activities in the patterns is given in Table 3, whereas only additional

information which is not identifiable from the activity diagram in Figure 2 is presented.

Pattern Activities Authentic Activities

This compound activity references an instance of the Alternate Phases pattern, which

shows that presence phases follow online phases (see Table 2). The only deviation

from conventional courses is that the thematic focus of the seminar wascollaboratively determined and assigned by the facilitator and the participants.

During and after the preliminary meeting, the participants unanimously agreed that the

innovative seminar style be employed.

Each participant was instructed to publish three documents as first deliverables on the

platform: His or her aims in the seminar, the topic of his/her PhD thesis, and the topic

of his/her seminar report. Before the next meeting they had to read each others

documents to be well-prepared for discussion. In the meeting, each participant orally

presented his or her thematic focus, and embedded that focus in the seminars thematic

context. During the discussions, many questions and issues arose. Each of the

participants was requested to adopt an issue and publish respective information on the

platform.

While the instructor fixed the deadlines for the documents to be published on the

platform before Presentation Phases begin, the participants, in addition to writing

their seminar report, had to host discussion forums on the platform, each addressing a

major issue of the seminar that is related to the topic of the respective participants

PhD thesis. E.g., one participants PhD thesis is on action research; the forum he has to

host is entitled, How can action research techniques be used in e-learning research?.

In this phase, the participants have elaborated reports and discussion contributions. All

deadlines were published on the platform and per electronic mail.

The facilitator has offered the participants to host additional meetings, if they felt the

need and desire to do so. In fact, there have been no additional meetings.

Contrary to traditional settings, there were short presentations of about fifteen minutes

followed by long discussions. Each participants PhD mentor has been invited to join

the presentation meeting. The majority of reactions on this mode were positive.

These have been the final phases of the seminar. The participants were offered a way

to provide their reactions and feedback online in a separate discussion forum. Four out

of five reactions were positive.

Table 3: Pattern activities and respective authentic seminar activities.

Some of the key experienceswith PCeL patterns made so far can be summarized as follows:

Introducing the Alternate Phases pattern brought real transparency in the flow of a courses activities.Even if the activities can be arranged other ways, it seems clear now that online phases must be

followed by presence phases for discussions and to deepen online experiences. Often, tight schedules

prevent the final feedback meeting from taking place, which leaves an unpleasant gap in the wholefeedback process, which itself accounts for large parts of the improvement of patterns.

Writing down the patterns from successful experiences introduces a shared vocabulary on the one hand,and supports better understanding and targeted arrangement of the learning processes taking place in

courses on the other hand.

The web template sections in the patterns help to greatly reduce the effort required to prepare andmaintain the folder structures, document sections, and provided resources on the learning platform.

Thereby the annoying task of rearranging folders and documents on the platform because of inappropriate

initial structuring rarely occurs.


7/8

Despite initial overhead, the pattern approach now yields significant organizational benefits, e.g., becausedocuments and locations can be explicitly linked to patterns activities. Thus, when applying and adapting

the patterns in different courses, dependent processes and documents can be easily identified and adapted

accordingly.

Through the presented concept of organizing the patterns by modeling at different levels of detail andgranularity, they become easily applicable on the one hand, and adaptable as needed on the other hand.

Online feedback at the end of the seminar was very encouraging. The innovative course style appealed tofour out of five participants. One of the negative reactions concerned the short presentations, which were

explicitly sought in the presentation meetings:

I think that short presentations cover only the surface of the subjects and this has rendered the

subsequent discussions a bit difficult for me. On the other hand, the participants were more active and

fresh after brief presentations. But to be honest, I have retained more from the longer presentations

However, feedback was predominantly positive, as exemplified by the following reaction:

I liked using the learning platform very much, because I had the opportunity to gain deeper insight

into the topics elaborated by the other participants. The idea to have short presentations and long

discussions turned out to be very effective: Because of the exchange of viewpoints in the discussions

following the presentations everyone could get more into the other topics, contrary to the one-way

communication predominant at long presentation sessions

Conclusions and Further Work

In this paper we have illustrated in which ways patterns can be used to capture successful learning practices. We

have argued that modeling the processes and artifacts of teaching and learning in patterns allows one to reuse

proven didactic principles and thus saves time for course design. This benefit is further strengthened in the case

that the patterns are implemented the form of customizable, parameterized web pages that significantly reduce

the effort spent on organizational issues.

The psychological and didactic baseline we chose to follow is most strongly influenced by Carl Rogers Person-

Centered Approach. This is because we believe that in our society the interpersonal values and social skills

fostered by this approach are most apt to make optimal use of intellectual knowledge. Thus our use of ICT and

in particular web-based patterns is targeted on two major issues: The first concerns the support of a thoughtful

combination of computer-mediated communication and content-provision with face-to face meetings. The

second focuses on reducing the effort spent on administrative and organizational issues in order to gain time fordeep individual and cooperative learning and personal growth.

Further research follows multiple threads. One of them addresses the capturing and implementation of further

patterns as well as the organization and implementation of the pattern repository. In this respect we experiment

with various eLearning platforms and are in the process formulating the requirements the pattern approach

poses on the design of e-Learning platforms. We also investigate ways of evaluating and assessing the effects of

Person-Centered e-Learning courses as well as individual scenarios as parts of these courses. Finally, we are

aware of the vital importance of appropriate staff-development strategies as a key factor for the success of

Person-Centered e-Learning.

References

Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S. & Silverstein, M. (1977). A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction. New York, NY:Oxford University Press

Alexander, C. (1979). The Timeless Way of Building. New York, NY: Oxford University Press

Anderson, B. (1993). Workshop Report Towards an Architecture Handbook. OOPSLA Messenger, 4(2), April 1993, pp.109-114

Appleton, B. (2000).Patterns and Software: Essential Concepts and Terminology[Online]. Retrieved Sept. 2, 2002, from

http://www.enteract.com/~bradapp/docs/patterns-intro.html

Aspy, D. N. (1972). Toward a Technology for Humanizing Education . Champaign, IL: Research Press Company


8/8

Baumgartner, P. (1997). Didaktische Anforderungen an (multimediale) Lernsoftware [in German]. In Issing, L. J. & Klimsa,P. (Eds.).Information und Lernen mit Multimedia, pp. 241-252, Weinheim: Psychologie Verlags Union

Baxter, S. & Gray, C. (2001). The application of student -centred learning approaches to clinical education.International

Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 26(Supplement), pp. 396-400

Buschmann, F., Meunier, R., Rohnert, H., Sommerlad, P. & Stal, M. (1996). Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture: A

System of Patterns. Chichester, U.K.: John Wiley & Sons

Derntl, M. & Motschnig-Pitrik, R. (2003). Towards a Pattern Language for Person-Centered e-Learning. Society forInformation Technology & Teacher Education (SITE) 2003 , Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA

Fowler, M. (1998).Analysis Patters: Reusable Object Models. Menlo Park, CA: Addison Wesley

Gamboa R., F., Perez-Silva, J. L., Lara-Rosano, F., Cabiedes C., F. & Miranda V., A. I. (2001). A student centeredmethodology for the development of a physics video based laboratory.Interacting with Computers, 13(5), pp. 527-548

Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R. & Vlissides, J. (1993). Design Patterns: Abstraction and Reuse of Object-OrientedDesign.European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP) '93 Conference Proceedings,Kaiserslautern, Germany, pp. 406-431

Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R. & Vlissides, J. (1995).Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software.

Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley

McConnell, D. (2000).Implementing Computer Supported Cooperative Learning. 2nd edition. London, U.K.: Kogan Page

McConnell, D. (2002). Negotiation, identity and knowledge in e -learning communities. Third International Conference onNetworked Learning 2002, Sheffield, U.K., pp. 248-257

Motschnig-Pitrik, R. (2001). Using the Internet with the Student-Centred Approach to Teaching - Method and Case Study.International Workshop on Interactive Computer-Aided Learning (ICL) 2001, Villach, Austria

Motschnig-Pitrik, R. (2002). Supporting Student-Centred Teaching with New Media: Case Study and Experience Report.Third International Conference on Networked Learning 2002 , Sheffield, U.K., pp. 456-464

Motschnig-Pitrik, R. & Derntl, M. (2002). Student-Centered eLearning (SCeL): Concept and application in a studentsproject on supporting learning.International Workshop on Interactive Computer-Aided Learning (ICL) 2002, Villach,Austria

Motschnig-Pitrik, R. & Holzinger, A. (2002). Student-Centered Teaching Meets New Media:Concept and Case Study.IEEE

Educational Technology & Society, 5(4), pp. 160-172

Motschnig-Pitrik, R. & Mallich, K. (2002). Learning at three levels: Web-support and experiential learning in projectmanagement.International Workshop on Interactive Computer-Aided Learning (ICL) 2002, Villach, Austria

OMG (2001). OMG Unified Modeling Language Specification, Version 1.4. Retrieved Dec. 6, 2002 from

http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?formal/01-09-67

Riehle, D. & Zllighoven, H. (1996). Understandung and Using Patterns in Software Development. Theory and Practice ofObject Systems, 2(1), 3-13

Rogers, C. R. (1961). On Becoming A Person A Therapists View of Psychotherapy. London, U.K.: Constable

Rogers, C. R. (1983).Freedom to Learn for the 80s. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company

Rogers, C. R. & Freiberg, H. J. (1994). Freedom to Learn. 3rd edition. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill PublishingCompany

Ryback, D. (1998).Putting Emotional Intelligence to Work Successful Leadership is More Than IQ. Boston, MA:Butterworth-Heinemann

Salmon, G. (2000).E-Moderating The Key to Teaching and Learning Online. London, U.K.: Kogan Page

Schank, R. (1997). Virtual Learning A Revolutionary Approach to Building a Highly Skilled Workforce. New York, NY:McGraw-Hill

Schmidt, D., Stal, M., Rohnert, H. & Buschmann, F. (2000). Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture. Volume 2: Patterns

for Concurrent and Networked Objects. Chichester, U.K.: John Wiley & Sons

Tidwell, J. (2002). UI Patterns and Techniques[Online]. Retrieved Nov. 19, 2002, from http://time-tripper.com/uipatterns

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UniversityPress

Acknowledgements

We sincerely thank our colleagues at tomcom GmbH, in particular Dietmar Treichel and Thomas Zeleny, for

providing us with their e-Learning and knowledge management platform dayta. We also thank Jrgen

Mangler for being a constructive and encouraging web master.

employing patterns for web-based person-centered leraning - concept and first experiencies

Documents