Artefact 1 - Applying Mobile Learning in a Face-to-Face University Course on Geology Didactics - MDDE 623

One of the most valuable takeaways of this assignment was the experience of working with people I had never met before, people with whom I shared a common goal and had to make sure that we would manage to achieve that. It was made clear from the beginning that we were all quite different people, working at completely different rates and the fact that I was the one who knew exactly what the course we were working on was, made things more complicated than I had initially thought. I had to find ways to provide a description of the course in detail and elaborate on the ideas in my mind so that the other members of the group could have a good sense of what we needed to build on. I am quite confident about my communication skills since, having been a teacher for over 25 years, I have always found ways to make myself understood, employing oral and written speech, pictures, demonstrations, drawings, but this was a different case. The rest of the group members were not my students but I had to find a way to convey a clear picture of what I had in mind. I decided to write down a detailed description of the course, with all the components and activities. I also send them lesson plans for the lessons we have chosen to enhance with the application of mobile learning. After the group members have been informed about all the course details, it was much easier to go on completing the assignment together (4.3, 4.8).

Communication through a computer screen can be tricky and I had some difficulty at first, but soon got used to it. During our Skype meetings, I tried to become a more active listener, paying attention to what the others had to say. I also made an effort to be more articulate and not respond impetuously (3.1). We had to identify the problems of the course as it was (1.1, 1.2), talk about our options so as to decide on what to include and which tools to utilize (1.6, 1.7) and make suggestions based on the theory supporting mobile learning (1.8).

There were a lot of lessons to be learned. I realized that I had to compensate for the lack of face-to-face interaction and that of the non-verbal cues by being really careful and concise during our virtual meetings. Delegating tasks, giving clear instructions, sharing, negotiating, listening, accepting, this is what cooperation means (4.5, 4.7). These were all difficult tasks to perform and, if I may say so, more difficult than the actual assignment itself. All four of us were very different personalities, with quite a busy schedule combining family and work. It requires a certain ability to recognize each person’s strong points and allow them to contribute accordingly. The University of Kent mentions seven different roles people can assume during teamwork: 

It took me some time to get to know my teammates but as soon as I realized their unique potential, a lot of the initial difficulty of how to share responsibilities for the assignment was overcome. We established often communication, took on certain tasks and worked in parallel. When we were ready, we put everything together and went through all the details. An intervention was also needed addressing a member of the group who did not keep up with the rest of us and we were in danger of missing the deadlines (6.5).

 What really surprised me, was how my initial idea flourished; it was enriched by the suggestions of the other members of the group. “Collaborative learning leads to deeper level learning, critical thinking, shared understanding and long-term retention of the learned material” (Kreijns et al., 2003, p.339). The theory of Connectivity by Siemens (2004) has been used as a reference of mine a lot of times since my first encounter with it during this assignment. As one of the principles of Connectivity supports “learning and knowledge rest in diversity of opinions” (Siemens, 2004).

 This assignment also marked the beginning of my acquaintance with some technological tools like the VoiceThread, the educational platform the University of Athens uses and Twitter as well. The choice of VoiceThread as our presentation platform was hard work since none of us had used it before. It took me hours to record my voice over the presentation but the result really paid off (4.6).

As far as the small-scale research that I conducted is concerned, there were a lot of points to be considered. First of all, I had to decide what my objectives were, meaning what I wanted to learn from this. I compiled the two questionnaires (5.1), created two Google Forms and shared them with the students of the course (3.5, 5.10). I informed them of the fact that it would be totally optional to participate and of course anonymous as it is dictated by ethics of research (5.11). The results I received made me realize that although participation in the research should be optional if an instructor decides on teaching in a blended way, he or she should make that clear from the beginning of the course and not afford any of the students the option not to take part in all activities. This is the insight I gained from reading the responses given by the participants (5.6, 5.8).

References:

Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P.A. & Jochems, W. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls of social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: a review of the research. Computers in human behavior 13(3), 335-353. Doi 10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00057- 2.

Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. Retrieved on November 12, 2006, from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm