Dynamic Content Manager–A New Conceptual Model for e-Learning

Dynamic Content Manager – A New Conceptual Model for e-Lear ning Terje Kristensen1, Yngve Lamo1, Kristin Ran Choi Hinna2 and Grete Oline Hole3 1

The Department of Computer Engineering, Bergen University College, Nygårdsgaten 112, N-5020 Bergen, Norway. [email protected]; [email protected] 2 Faculty of Education, 3 Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, Bergen University College, Bergen, Norway. [email protected]; [email protected]

Abstr act. In this paper a conceptual model for e-learning, which uses elements from learning Objects and Concepts Maps, is introduced. The learning material is divided into atomic units and organized in graphs called Knowledge Map, Learning Map and Student Map. Such a structure provides an easy-to-use navigation interface for existing learning material. Any course content created is stored in a repository for future reference. The model is used to structure a course in geometry for post-graduate teacher students. In teacher education one has to account for the ability to transfer knowledge to students, in addition to the assimilation of knowledge. The established model is therefore discussed in a learning or didactical context.

1 Introduction The main goal of the teaching process is to develop knowledge. A methodology to structure and model the learning process is a means to achieve this. One widely used tool for organizing, representing and building knowledge is Concept Map (CM) [10]. Since its introduction there has been extensive research regarding how to use CM to enhance teaching and learning [4]. CM is a tool well suited for representing knowledge structures. However, it does not address the dynamic process of learning. To represent the entire learning process, the Dynamic Content Manager (DCM) model for e-learning was introduced in 2007 at Bergen University College [8],[9]. It makes it possible to create knowledge elements at a finer granularity level to reuse them in various courses. Resources (R), assessments and evaluations (E) are attributed to the knowledge elements, and hence may be imported from existing learning material. The model is used to represent structures for knowledge, learning scenarios and individual students’ learning. These are implemented as Knowledge Map, Learning Map and Student Map. This approach promotes adaptive learning, flexibility in the learning process and share and reuse of learning material [1],[8].

The model provides a more flexible tool for teachers who are planning to use other learning scenarios than traditional Learning Management Systems (LMS). Within DCM, the learning resources and progress may be structured and organized to maximize flexibility for both teachers and students to promote tailored learning [3]. A teacher giving a course can divide the learning material into atomic units that may be organized into the different maps. The Knowledge Map provides an overview of all the learning resources available to an instructor. The Learning Map is based on these resources, providing a functional overview of a given course and the didactical approach to the material. The Student Map monitors each student’s learning progress and provides evaluation and feedback mechanisms. This structure provides an easy-to-use navigation interface for existing learning material. Any course content created is stored in the repository for future reference. As shown in [1], the DCM Learning Objects may lead to the use of these Knowledge Objects as basic elements, to construct a more elaborated version of CM. An example on how to use these structures, when teaching geometry for teachers, is presented. In contrast to ordinary education, which is mostly skill- and fact-based, teacher education also requires understanding of didactical processes and metaknowledge of the given subject. The DCM model is especially suited to learning scenarios, where it is important to create deep learning [11]. The evaluation perspective is especially important in teacher education. One must construct the best learning path for the students through the knowledge space and how to evaluate their learning outcome. This is the job of the teacher, and she has to do it appropriately to succeed in promoting learning. By using the DCM model one is able to create a more thoroughly didactical understanding of the topic.

2

Knowledge Modelling

All successful transfer of knowledge requires understanding of the concepts within the teaching subject. Knowledge modelling becomes a tool promoting consciousness of the subject in this meta-perspective.

2.1 Or ganizing Knowledge To promote learning one has to discover the inner relationship between the learning components and convey them to the learners. According to the cognitive learning perspective, the goal is to facilitate mental processes which mediate between existing and new knowledge [10]. Within this perspective the focus is on how students understand and solve problems by symbol processing. Information is received through attention and integrated in memory. Furthermore, it is translated into knowledge and integrated into the learner’s’ cognitive structure for later retrieval. In this context the notion of schema, information processing, storage and retrieval are important. Knowledge is considered as abstract symbolic representations. The

teacher’s primary role is to transfer knowledge by lecturing and explaining the concepts [4].

2.2 Concept Maps CM has been used for measuring the quality of learning, as a tool for letting the students illustrate the difference between Deep and Surface learning [11]. By use of CM the teacher may be guided to adjust her teaching to different Learning Styles [3]. Through this, one wishes to promote meaningful learning instead of rote-learning. By considering CM as a tool for facilitating learning, it can be viewed as a mirror to the students cognitive structures within a given domain, in order to gain insight into their understanding. As Kinchin and Alias [6] would say, as a “window into the thinking of the students”. In this way CM is an efficient meta-cognitive tool to promote understanding on how new materials interacts with existing cognitive structures. This links the way constructivism uses CM to more socio-cultural learning theories [7].

2.3 Content Units In the DCM model knowledge is represented by Content Units (CU), which consist of Learning Resources and Evaluations (E). Constructivism views learning as a process in which the learner actively constructs or builds new ideas or concepts, based upon current and past knowledge. Knowledge is closely connected to previous experiences. Learners need to construct their own understanding. The primary role of teaching is to design situations for the learners to promote their creation of the necessary mental constructions. The learner will internalize concepts, rules and general principles which further on can be applied in a real-world context. Knowledge is considered as a constructed entity made by every learner through the learning process [10]. The DCM facilitates learning by constructivism. It has been designed to enhance the functionality of knowledge elements, courses and resources. The changes made to the underlying knowledge elements are then carefully treated by versioning and history tracking. This ensures that a specific course or aggregation of knowledge elements, which the teacher has created, can appear unchanged. She is then able to follow the various revisions made on it. Great emphasis is also placed on the design of knowledge elements to provide seamless addition of external functionalities.

2.4 Knowledge Maps The basic requirement of the DCM is the knowledge repository, from which knowledge elements may be drawn and organised into a hierarchical structure of the course. This is represented by the Knowledge Map. The CU must be structured and organised in such a way that the teacher actually gets the information she needs to

design a course. There must also be a way of adding knowledge to the actual repository. The Knowledge Map provides the overview of the total knowledge in a given learning domain. The map is a graph where the nodes represent content units of the repository. The arrows placed between any two related CU is representing the relations between contents. When someone has created a course, there is a relation between the actual units used. The instructor who creates a new course, can use the arrows to indicate which units that can be of interest. T1: Symmetry

T2: Reflection

T5: Rotation T3: Translation

T4: Glide Reflection

Fig. 1. An example of a Knowledge Map labeled Theme (T 1 - T 5 )

The DCM’s “atomic” units of knowledge make it possible to construct CM-like structures as a tool for both the teachers and the students. This structure will enable DCM to provide the teacher with a graphical navigation tool to explore the knowledge repository. Such a visual presentation gives the teacher an overview of the resources of the repository and enables her to create the knowledge elements. Symmetry

T2::Reflection

R1: Book

E1: Quiz

R1: Book

E1: Quiz

R2: Web

E2: Exercises

R2: Web

E3: make CM

R3: Wiki def.

E3: make CM

R3: Wiki def.

E4: make LM

T3: Translation

T4: Glide reflection

R1: Book

E1: Quiz

R1: Book

R2: Wiki def.

E2: Exercises

R2: Wiki def.

E1: Quiz

Fig. 2. Extracted Knowledge Map displaying different Resources and Evaluations of four CUs. Due to space limitations Rotation is omitted

The interconnection between the various knowledge elements defined by many educators can also be used for data mining purposes and for creating better structuring of the knowledge repository. In a specific course the motivation of using a Knowledge Map is to model the dependencies in the learning process. The

interconnection between the various knowledge elements defined by many educators can also be used for data mining purposes and for creating better structuring of the knowledge repository. In a specific course the motivation of using a Knowledge Map is to model the dependencies in the learning process. However, these units should not be viewed as imposing requirement on the content selection. The teacher is free to select other nodes and use them as prerequisites, or to create her owns. Figure 2 displays a sample Knowledge Map consisting of four knowledge units from the geometry domain. A teacher navigating the Knowledge Map would also be interested in the inner structure of the nodes, in order to select the elements she needs when creating the course. The system therefore needs to keep track of this inner structure. The user interface should allow for easy expansion of nodes to display the resources and evaluations, as shown in figure 3. T1: Symmetry R1: Book

∨

E1: Quiz

R2: Web program

E2: Exercises

R3: Wiki def.

E3: make CM E4: make LM

Fig. 3. A learning Map constructed from the Knowledge Map of figure 1 and 2. Notice the disjunctive relation between Evaluation and Resources 1 and 3

3

The Learning Process

Structuring the learning process is essential to construct optimal learning scenarios from the learning material that is represented in the Knowledge Map. The actual learning scenario (Learning Map) is created by individual teachers due to their didactical understanding of the topic.

3.1 Knowledge Map A Learning Map is a representation of the learning process. The Content Units are selected from the Knowledge Map and expanded to ensure that the Resources and Evaluations become nodes in the graph. Formally, there is a graph homomorphism from the Learning Map to the Knowledge Map. Resources or Evaluations not needed in the course may be omitted. The Evaluations may be weighted to indicate their importance in the grading of the entire course. The Learning Map relations may occur between Content Units or between

Resources and Evaluations. Such relations indicate that one element is a prerequisite of another.

4

Student Modelling

The DCM system also supports student modelling. The system defines a simple model of the learner and categorizes him, based on the actual Evaluations. The teacher must often update the category of the learner, based on assessments of the students’ assignments. The DCM has a module where the learner is guided through questions that have been associated with the knowledge elements of the course he is taking. The learner’s category is taken into consideration by a default optional filtering mechanism and provides the learner with questions.

4.1 Student Map A Student Map is the model of the learning process of an individual student. It displays the Resources and the Content Units that the student has encountered. The most important aspect is probably the Evaluations which show the student’s answers and results. Figure 4 displays the maps of two different students who have taken a course based on the Learning Map of figure 3. The Learning Map has a branching point where each student may choose what resources to take, resulting in different looking Student Maps. T1: Symmetry R1: Book

∨

E1: Quiz

R2: Web program

E2: Exercises

R3: Wiki def.

E3: make CM E4: make LM

Fig. 4. Two different student maps derived from the Learning Map of figure 3

5

DCM in Geometry

Knowledge modelling is often used to represent learning of mathematics [5]. In this paper we emphasize the use of knowledge modelling, both for learning of mathematics and as a tool to develop meta-knowledge. This is of special importance for teach-

er students. The students have to make their own conceptual domain models represented as Knowledge and Learning Maps. In geometry, there are many different concepts which are crucial for understanding of the topic. For instance, a Symmetry Relation may be realized by doing a Reflection, a Rotation, a Translation or a Glide Reflection. The Symmetry Concept may be interpreted at a higher abstraction level than these basic concepts. This means that to understand the Symmetry Concept one has to first understand the basic concepts such as Reflection, Rotation, Translation and Glide Reflection. This is reflected in the Knowledge Map of Figure 1. The activities defined by the term Evaluations in table 1 have no weights. The Evaluations document student activities, which are an important part of the learning process, in addition to grading. By Evaluation E 1 – E 4 one measures the different aspects of the knowledge, such as facts, skills, meta-knowledge or didactical knowledge. The different kinds of Evaluations are connected to the outcomes stated in the syllabus and the curriculum. All these aspects are important to ensure that the student has the desired knowledge to teach mathematics, for instance in Primary School. Table 1. A Sample Content Unit

T1: Symmetry Resources R1: Book Chap 3 R2: Origami web program R3: Wiki definition R4: Video of geometrical constructions

Evaluations E1:Quiz E2: Exercise, ruler/compass E3: Making Knowledge map E4: Creating a course, making Learning Map

Aspects Facts Skills Meta-knowledge Didactical knowledge

The Resources given by R1 –R4 illustrate some of the learning material presented to the students. To ensure that the students achieve knowledge about facts, practical skills, concept structures and strategies the teacher needs to select adequate resources. Available resources such as text-books and online resources like animations, videos, images and interactive programs, may be selected from the Knowledge Repository. An awareness of choosing the optimal learning material can later be used by the teacher students in their own teaching practice. A Learning Map of the Symmetry Concept is presented in Figure 3. The teacher has selected two sources to obtain the factual knowledge which is required to answer the Quiz, given by E 1 . The Student Map in Figure 4 offers an opportunity to monitor the knowledge that the teacher students have acquired. One of the students uses a text-book and the other one a wiki. The educator may evaluate the results of the students based on their learning paths. The teachers may get a clear picture of the

efficiency of using different approaches to the learning of the Symmetry Concept after some repetitions of the course.

6

Discussion

One key issue of the DCM model is that different learning aspects may be emphasized. In the course designed for teacher students the learning outcome could be divided into factual, skill-based, meta- and didactical knowledge. In geometry factual knowledge is theoretical knowledge about formulae, names and symbols. Skill-based knowledge is practical use of a procedure or to design a solution of a problem. In geometry, for instance, it is crucial to have practical skills of using ruler and compass. To be a good teacher one also needs to have knowledge of the didactics of mathematics and meta- knowledge. Meta-knowledge is crucial knowledge for planning, modelling, learning and modification of domain-knowledge. This implies that the students have to be conscious about their own thinking about mathematics. It is important that teacher students have a conscious attitude to their own learning process. They must be able to reflect upon their “doings” to develop a solid basis for their own teaching. To achieve resilient knowledge it is essential for the students to get awareness about their own possible learning outcome and their teaching practice. By resilient knowledge we mean knowledge that is resistant to cultural influences. This kind of knowledge distinguishes it from the traditional way of considering learning. For teachers it is important to develop a strong conceptual understanding of the problem domain to be able to understand the thinking of individual students. This is necessary to give the students problems which are suited to their cognitive level. However, in this project the students learn to model their own knowledge structures by using different graphical techniques. Such graphs may be used by the students to reflect upon their knowledge acquisition. The students document their learning progress by monitoring their Student Maps. To be a good teacher it is important to be conscious about your own knowledge. If you are not able to express knowledge to yourself, how can you then be able to explain it to your students? It is difficult to evaluate different aspects of knowledge. One often considers only the aspect of knowledge which fits to the framework of the learning outcomes. The evaluation of other aspects can be done in different ways. One possibility is a multiple-choice quiz to evaluate factual knowledge. To evaluate skills one have to make a practical test where the students carry out a construction by compass and ruler. In an e-learning scenario this may, for instance, be done by using interactive ICT-tools. The teacher students also have to demonstrate connection between practical skills and knowledge structure by creating Knowledge Maps. However, the Evaluation of their pedagogical and didactical knowledge must be done in another way. One may let them write about their own learning process where one is reflecting upon the connection between different aspects of the subject. The different types of assignments may be weighted differently. The students will then know what kind of knowledge that is emphasized in the course. Such kind of

assessment is different from traditional practice in Norwegian schools. In the DCM model a student will be assessed in a more comprehensive way by considering his own knowledge construction. In this way the student strengthens his meta-cognitive understanding. This is one important aspect of the DCM approach. By practical experience one develops conceptual images that can be expressed in Knowledge Maps. Such a language of concepts may be used to transfer “internalized knowledge” to the learning society [12].

7

Conclusion

In this paper we have used a graph based approach, DCM, to model the learning process of teacher students in geometry. It is shown how the Knowledge Map is used to systematize the content of a course. Different kinds of resources and ways of evaluating them are demonstrated. The approach is flexible in respect to organising the content of a course. The content includes learning resources, practical tasks and evaluations. In teacher education one uses special ways of evaluation, since one has to consider different aspects of knowledge. The Learning Map is created by the teacher to design a course. It describes a selected scenario as a path through the content. The actual Learning Map may vary between different teachers, even for courses with the same content and syllabus. This is due to the individual didactical understanding of each teacher. The Student Map is created by the system, based on the results and weights of the Evaluations. It represents a model of the learning progress of individual students taking the course. The Student Map may be used by the educator to monitor the learning progress. In teacher education the students also need to create their own maps to describe their conceptual understanding of the subject and to create their own teaching scenarios. In this way the students gain experience with mathematical (Meta) modelling. By using a system such as DCM, based on Knowledge Map, Learning Map and Student Map, one adapts the e-learning system to the learning process. This is in contrast to traditional Learning Management Systems where the learning scenario has to be fitted to the system.

References 1. 2.

3.

Eide, S., Kristensen, T., Lamo, Y. A Model for Dynamic Content Based Elearning systems. In ACM Proceedings EATIS, Aracaju, Brasil, 2008. Greeno, J.G., Collins, A., Resnick, L.B. Cognition and Learning. In D.C., Berliner, Calfee, R.C. Robert (eds): Handbook of Educational Psychology. New York, Macmillan Library Reference, USA, 1996. Gardener, H. Frames of mind. The theory of multiple intelligences. Basis Books, 1993.

4.

Hay, D., Kinchin, I.M. Using Concept Mapping to Measure Learning Quality. In Education & Training, pp 167- 182, 2000. 5. Kinchin, I.M. Using Concept Maps to Reveal Understanding: A Two-Tier Analysis. In School Science Review. 81:296, pp 41-46, 2000. 6. Kinchin, I.M., Alias, M. Exploiting variations in concept map morphology as a lesson-planning tool for trainee teachers in higher education. In Journal of InService Education 31:3, pp 569-592, 2005. 7. Kinchin, I.M., Hay, D., Adams, A. How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to aid learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development. In Educational Research 42:1, pp 42-57, 2000. 8. Kristensen, T., Lamo, Y., Mughal, K., Tekle, K.M., Bottu, A.K.. Towards a dynamic, content based e-learning platform. In V. Uskov, editor, Computers and Advanced Technology in Education. ACTA Press, pp 107–114, 2007. 9. Kristensen, T., Hinna, K., Hole, G.O., Lamo, Y. Different E-learning paradigms - a Survey. In Proceeding of MIT-LINC (Massachusets Institute of Technology Learning International Network Consortium) 4th International Conference: Technology-Enabled Education: a Catalyst for positive Change. Amman, Jordan, October, 2007. 10. Novak, J., Canãs, A. The theory underlying Concept Maps and how to construct them. In Technical report, IHMC CMaps Tools, Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition, USA, 2006/2008. 11. Marton, F., Hounsell. D.J., Entwistle. N.J. The experience of learning. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press, 1977. 12. Perkins, D.N., Salomon, G. Are cognitive skills context-bound? In Educational Researcher 18:1, pp 16-25, 1998.