FLEXIBILITY ON LEARNING PROCESS

José Palma

Mathematics Department, Escola Superior de Tecnologia de Setúbal, Setúbal, Portugal

Martinha Piteira

Informations Systems Department, Escola Superior de Tecnologia de Setúbal, Setúbal, Portugal

Keywords: Activities, e-Activities, Flexibility, e/b-Learning, Motivation, Learning activities, Moodle.

Abstract: On this paper we present a methodology (FlexLearn), which allows flexibility on learning process. Using

this methodology will be possible students to choose frequenting classrooms or online classes. On this paper

we present some rules and procedures, which certainly may provide flexibility on the teacher’s curricular

unity. We also present those we consider to be the best practices to the FlexLearn methodology application

success. On a curricular unity that implements FlexLearn methodology, teacher will be able to provide

instructions, contents and activities proposals, ensuring classroom and online activities students learning.

The activities proposals contents, both for classroom and online students, must be equivalent, assuring the

learning compliance.

1 INTRODUCTION

FlexLearn methodology will allow learning process

flexibility, in courses that use face-to-face or

blended-learning methodologies. The methodology

will be implemented in the courses that are taught in

Setúbal Polytechnic – High School of Technology.

Through FlexLearn methodology

implementation in courses, students may choose to

attend classroom sessions or alternatively, make

learning activities online without needing to go to

institution, except at agreed intervals. This

methodology will allow students to choose how they

want to achieve their learning, allowing freedom of

choice.

With FlexLearn methodology implementation,

teacher should be able to plan his course providing

instructions, contents and activities proposals to

ensure the learning quality, both for students, who

attend regular classes, and for those who choose to

perform only online activities.

The proposed activities are not necessarily

completely separated, although usually they are not

the same for students of both types of participation.

However, they must be equivalent, ensuring that

learning is effective in both modes.

The proposed learning activities, regardless the

format chosen to participate, must:

• Be presented effectively (and professionally);

• Represent added value to the student in pursuit

of learning goals;

• Motivate students;

• Use assessment methods that effectively certify

the acquired skills.

2 E-LEARNING

SUSCEPTIBILITY

To flexibly courses we must analyse if all the

contents of a particular curricular unit can be taught

remotely, as effectively as, the teaching traditional

method. This analyse is important because, there are

some contents with specific characteristics

preventing that learning in e-Learning

methodologies is as effective, compared with the

learning face-to-face methodology.

Bednarczyk and Rudak (2009) refer three

characteristics that make an issue of an academic

field that could not be e-taught (or taught using e-

Learning methods), which means it cannot be

transferred to the Internet without registering losses

152

Palma J. and Piteira M..

FLEXIBILITY ON LEARNING PROCESS.

DOI: 10.5220/0003414601520155

In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU-2011), pages 152-155

ISBN: 978-989-8425-50-8

 2011 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)

in terms of educational quality (regardless of the

used technology).

• A subject isn’t susceptible to e-teaching if to

accomplish their learning, requires interaction

between people (eg, teacher - student, student -

student) and can’t be replaced by the

interaction allowed in an e-learning

environment.

• A subject isn’t e-education susceptible, if we

demand that students work or have contact

with real materials or tools, which cannot be

replaced by 3D representation systems, or not

be available to everyone in their residence

place.

• A subject isn’t e-education susceptible, if it

requires practical skills acquisition or

conducting experiments that can’t be

performed in a virtual environment or in the

student’s residence.

In many curricular units, like mathematics, the

traditional teaching is based on two types of classes:

theoretical and practical. In theoretical classes are

set theorems, demonstrated some of the most

important, results are presented and exercises are

solved to illustrate. Students must complete the

knowledge obtained during classroom, by reading

the manual that includes detailed explanation of the

matter.

The mathematics teaching transfer to Internet

based platforms doesn’t involve significant changes.

Lectures in classrooms can be replaced by video or

multimedia objects, incorporating text, sound and

image. In addition, the textbook with detailed

exposition of these matters can still be used. Teacher

and students have at their disposal, in the distance

learning platform, communication tools that allow

the first one to propose activities and monitor its

implementation. Also discussion forums allow

students to put questions and seek for answers, but

they can also answer questions from colleagues, and

this whole process takes place under the supervision

of a teacher.

Another interaction example is the exercises

sending by teacher to be solved by students,

individually or in groups, which should send the

answers to the platform, being accessible to their

colleagues. So this way we simulate the practical

lessons.

The interaction that is required for mathematics

learning can be effectively achieved through

mechanisms provided by distance learning

platform’s like Moodle.

There has been none of the characteristics that

make it a matter not susceptible to e-teaching, the

math teaching transfer to a remote mode only

requires changes in how it is taught traditionally.

The traditional foreign language classes, English

for example, are based on the reading of prepared

texts in that language, teaching grammar rules and

vocabulary, such as conversation activities between

teacher and students in foreign language.

In this case there are a number of factors, issues

and activities that can be easily transferred to the

asynchronous teaching in e-learning methodology.

Teacher can provide texts, videos or other learning

objects, prepared for distance education that support

and consequently allow us to simulate the performed

activities in language laboratories. Moreover, the

work done by students can be corrected and returned

with comments by teachers using the platform. We

can also implement a set of online tests that allow

students to practice grammar and vocabulary.

However, in foreign language learning some

aspects of interaction between teacher and student

that take place in classroom can’t be effectively

replaced by the interaction allowed by the available

tools on the distance learning platform. In particular

it’s not possible for the teacher, with asynchronous

tools, to make a correction to the student’s

pronunciation. This is only possible in the

classroom, or eventually using a synchronous tool

which may allow real-time dialogue between teacher

and student. However, if we do not intend to use the

synchronous tools, we can assume that in the foreign

language teaching context there are issues or

activities that are susceptible or and others not to e-

teaching.

In the case of chemistry, in addition to

theoretical knowledge, which can be transferred to

the internet, the chemist has to acquire practical

knowledge. At any given time, students will need to

contact directly with the materials, feel the smell and

viscosity, among others. In addition, they must

contact with the tools used in lab, learning to handle

them.

Thus, as in the case of foreign languages, some

chemistry topics and activities learning aren’t

executable in e-teaching, particularly because

chemistry education requires that students work with

real materials or tools that can’t be replaced by 3D

representation systems and aren’t available for all

students in their residence place.

When we evaluate the subject susceptibility to e-

education, taking into account the second and third

characteristic, we can consider engineering as a

good example. An engineer, besides his theoretical

knowledge, must have practical skills and know the

different types of tools, materials and used

FLEXIBILITY ON LEARNING PROCESS

153

techniques which can’t be learned only through

pictures, video or simulation in virtual

environments. At some point, an engineer will have

to work using tools and in real laboratories carrying

out experiments which may enrich his reality

knowledge.

It’s therefore the teacher’s responsibility to

define contents and activities in each curricular unit,

which are not susceptible of e-teaching, according to

the susceptibility characteristics defined previously.

For all the subjects and activities not susceptible to

e-teaching, student’s presence in the classroom in

moments previously defined must be obligatory.

3 LEARNING OBJECTS

The teacher should prepare in advance the objects

that will support the activities. A first step is to

define the objectives and competencies to be

acquired by the students, later must be defined the

content and activities that students must accomplish.

Once defined the content and activities, learning

objects should be prepared.

These objects preparation could be an

intimidating task for the teacher. In most cases,

teachers don’t have skills or knowledge to conceive

elaborate interactive multimedia objects, which

require the production interdisciplinary team's

establishment. Given the budgetary constraints and

the large number and variety of curricular units that

make up a course, these teams establishment is

generally unaffordable for the educational

institution. Alternative strategies are required.

We can anticipate some rules that help and

facilitate the task of teaching the resources definition

that will be used in the distance education context:

Objects traditionally used in classroom teaching,

are generally valid in online learning

Textbooks, pdf documents, powerpoint

presentations, are study useful objects, whatever the

mode of teaching.

In addition to traditional objects, for students

who do not attend classes, teachers should

provide video objects with sound and image to

simulate a live class.

There are several alternative strategies to obtain

these objects. The simplest is to search the internet,

on YouTube (www.youtube.com), Teacher Tube

(www.teachertube.com), or in the various learning

objects repositories such as Merlot

(www.merlot.org), or MIT repository (ocw.mit.edu),

any object that meets the requested requirements. In

many knowledge areas such as mathematics, there is

a large videos profusion and other objects that cover

various topics and can be used as part of the course.

Another strategy is to introduce video and sound

in powerpoint which are usually used in the

classroom. This can be achieved by using a tool like

Articulate (www.articulate.com).

You can still turn to tools like HyperCam

(www.hyperionics.com/hc/) or Screencast-o-matic

(www.screencast-o-matic.com), which capturing

sound and image directly from the computer screen

can be used in short explaining videos production of

a particular subject.

Finally, an alternative strategy, with higher costs,

is to directly record the classes, and provide these

videos to students in online mode.

Use the resources provided by the distance

learning platform for the learning objects

parametrization.

The distance education platforms, such as Moodle,

provide a relatively easy to parametrize tools kit,

enabling the teacher, with limited computer

knowledge, parametrize relatively elaborate learning

objects and useful in the teaching process.

Tools like the lesson, wikis, mini-test, forum,

allow teachers to implement and support a

diversified e-activities set.

4 FLEXLEARN

The FlexLearn methodology is based on the design

courses theory proposed by Beatty (2008) and is

supported on six fundamental principles: possibility

of student choice, activities outlining and

compulsory attendance moments, equivalence,

reuse, support and good practices.

Possibility of student choice: Provide alternative

participation modes and allow students to choose

between different modes

The proposed activities for each participation mode

should be duly proposed and scheduled, providing

students the possibility of choice. Without choice

there is no flexibility.

Activities explanation and required presence

moments: Must be pre-defined the activities and

times when students must necessarily be present

in the classroom

Some activities may require the student’s physical

presence in the classroom, for example to perform a

test or an experiment in the laboratory. The teacher

should explain in the discipline plan the activities

CSEDU 2011 - 3rd International Conference on Computer Supported Education

154

and times when all students must be present in the

classroom, including students who opt for online

participation mode.

Equivalency: Provide equivalent learning

activities in all participation modes

Alternative participation modes should lead to

equivalent learning. The equivalence, however, does

not imply equality. For example, a forum discussion

on a proposed topic by the teacher may be socially

less rewarding than the discussion on this topic in

class attendance. In each case, notwithstanding,

students should be challenged to reflect on the

learning content, contribute with their ideas for

discussion and interact with their peers.

Reuse: Use the learning objects, specifically

proposed for each type of participation as objects

of learning for all students

Many of the activities that take place in the

classroom can be captured and made available on

the platform. Podcasts, videos, files of presentations

that result from activities conducted in class

attendance can be quite useful for students who opt

for online participation mode. Similarly, the

activities undertaken by students online, such as

those reflected in conversations in chat rooms,

asynchronous discussion forums, work groups,

glossary entries, can be important learning material

for students following attendance mode. Learning

objects that result from activities undertaken by

students in different ways, should therefore be

provided as study elements for all students

Support: The teacher should ensure support

mechanisms for students equally effective in both

modes of participation

In both modes, the teacher should ensure

mechanisms that allow the student to ask and see

their doubts clarified. In present mode, students can

ask questions in class, furthermore, the teacher

usually reserve a time in his schedule to attendance

in his cabinet. For the online mode students, the

teacher should provide mechanisms, such as a forum

for questions or a schedule for chat attendance

where students can ask and clarify their doubts

Good practice: In both participation modes the

teacher must follow a set of procedures that are

identified and accepted as good practice

The teaching quality is largely by the observance of

good practice. The teacher should present the best

appropriate practices to each teaching mode: face-to-

face or online.

REFERENCES

Alexander, S., 2001. E-learning developments and

experiences. Education and Training, Bradford 43(4-

5):240-248.

Bednarczyk, I., Rudak, L., 2009. Openness of academic

subjects for single and multipart e-learning. Eunis

Congress, from:

http://www.eunis.es/myreviews/FILES/CR2/p55.pd.

Biggs, J. B., 2002. Aligning teaching and assessment to

curriculum objectives. LTSN Imaginative Curriculum

Online.

Chiappe, A.; Segovia, Y.; Rincon, Y., 2007. Toward an

instructional design model based on learning objects.

Educational Technology Research and Development,

Boston: Springer, pp. 671--681.

Ley, K., 2005. Motivating the distant learner to be a self-

directed learner. 20th Annual Conference on Distance

Teaching & Learning. University of Wisconsin.

Palma, J., Piteira, M., 2008. The activities value in e-

learning. EUNIS Congress. From:

http://eunis.dk/papers/p23.pdf..

Salmon, G., 2002. E-tivities - The key to active online

learning. London: Kogan Page.

FLEXIBILITY ON LEARNING PROCESS

155