Volitional-supported learning with Open Educational Resources

User-centred web applications such as Wikis or Weblogs are becoming increasingly popular. In contrast to the early Internet, these applications especially focus on the participation of people, on the creation, sharing and modifying of content and on an easy access. Based on this, they are assumed to contribute to self-regulated and life-long learning which is on the agenda of most industrialized countries throughout Europe. However, as shown in the recently published road mapping work of the Open E-Learning Content Observatory Services (OLCOS) project, comprehensive frameworks for learning processes that make use of Open Educational Resources (OER) are missing. In particular it remains unclear how OER can actually contribute to forms of self-regulated learning since this requires a great deal of volitional competence, i.e. the ability to deal with distractions and fluctuations of motivation or emotion which is therefore regarded as a crucial factor (Deimann & Keller, 2006). In this regard, the Volitional Design Model (Deimann, 2007) provides a useful instrument to unfold the potentials of OER by (1) targeting key aspects of the learner’s behaviour in the learning process, and (2) suggesting powerful strategies to tackle decreased motivation. An exemplified volitional design approach using OER will be discussed. (DIPF/Orig.

Open Education and Bildung: Ideas, Assumptions, and Their Vigour to Transform Higher Education

We are witnessing tremendous changes and transformations in learning and education due to the advancement of digital technologies. This pertains not only to various forms of e-learning but also to more recent sorts of open online learning environments such as MOOCs or P2P-University. As Bell (2011) has argued, learning theories fall short of explaining change in learning activities as these theories do not consider the complexity of technology, social network, and individual activities. Therefore, this paper revisits the German concept of Bildung (Formation) to get a better understanding of the ongoing changes in learning environments, especially in informal Higher Education

The dark side of the MOOC - A critical inquiry on their claims and realities

Building on the work of French philosopher Michel Foucault, this paper utilises critical discourse analysis to examine claims attached to MOOCs in New York Times articles published between 2012 and 2013. Discourse analysis is proposed as a valuable tool enabling the understanding of MOOCs as historically constituted and socially constructed “events” with hidden meanings masked by rhetoric slogans. Noting that language is not just the reflection of social and psychological life but rather constructs social realities, this work posits how both media and commercial MOOC providers have constructed an “education is broken” narrative which states (1) traditional universities are no longer able to equip learners with that kind of skills that are needed to master the challenges of our digital society and (2) technological innovations are now available that will revolutionize education, i.e. provide world class education in a cheap and effective way to every person on the planet. Through structural analysis of the characteristics of the articles as an empirical base for the analysis of the discursive formation, the author reviews a data set of 58 MOOC articles, analysing the corpus in terms of distinctive discourse strands, i.e. certain (sub-) topics are summarized into groups. The author concludes that three different versions of such social worlds are collectively constructed: First, MOOCs are portrayed as something totally innovative and novel, leading to a collective feeling of enthusiasm because, for the first time in history, we are able to educate huge masses of people around the world at an affordable price; second, MOOCs are depicted as embedded in an evolutionary process of online education, yet identified to be “disruptive innovations;” third; moral regulation, and most particularly responsibilisation of the self, is framed by neoliberal arguments to construct the vision of a “self-responsible” learner who is in charge of his/her learning process

The dark side of the MOOC - A critical inquiry on their claims and realities

Building on the work of French philosopher Michel Foucault, this paper utilises critical discourse analysis to examine claims attached to MOOCs in New York Times articles published between 2012 and 2013. Discourse analysis is proposed as a valuable tool enabling the understanding of MOOCs as historically constituted and socially constructed “events” with hidden meanings masked by rhetoric slogans. Noting that language is not just the reflection of social and psychological life but rather constructs social realities, this work posits how both media and commercial MOOC providers have constructed an “education is broken” narrative which states (1) traditional universities are no longer able to equip learners with that kind of skills that are needed to master the challenges of our digital society and (2) technological innovations are now available that will revolutionize education, i.e. provide world class education in a cheap and effective way to every person on the planet. Through structural analysis of the characteristics of the articles as an empirical base for the analysis of the discursive formation, the author reviews a data set of 58 MOOC articles, analysing the corpus in terms of distinctive discourse strands, i.e. certain (sub-) topics are summarized into groups. The author concludes that three different versions of such social worlds are collectively constructed: First, MOOCs are portrayed as something totally innovative and novel, leading to a collective feeling of enthusiasm because, for the first time in history, we are able to educate huge masses of people around the world at an affordable price; second, MOOCs are depicted as embedded in an evolutionary process of online education, yet identified to be “disruptive innovations;” third; moral regulation, and most particularly responsibilisation of the self, is framed by neoliberal arguments to construct the vision of a “self-responsible” learner who is in charge of his/her learning process

Rethinking OER and their use: open education as Bildung

Despite the recent increases of interest in Open Education – notably in the Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs; Fini, 2009) - it has been continuously asserted that this form of social knowledge production lacks a philosophical or theoretical foundation (Vandenberg, 1975). Similar accusations have been made with respect to distance education, which some have identified as being slow to engage with critical debates in theory and research (Evans & Nation, 1992). In a similar vein, Danaher, Wyer and Bartlett (1998) claim that researchers in open and distance learning tend to draw on too narrow a range of theoretical resources in their research. Given the considerable rise of Open Education over the last years, these critical appraisals urge us to expand theoretical approaches to refine our understanding of evolving pedagogical and technological relations (cf. Bell, 2011). In this paper, we contribute to debates surrounding open education and open educational resources by introducing the concept of Bildung (self-cultivation; self-realization) as a powerful reflective tool. We will elaborate on the potentials of Bildung by reviewing the history of the concept and exploring the extent to which Bildung can provide open education with a theoretical framework. Our focus here will not be exclusively on open educational resources (OER): it will be stressed that ‘openness’ in education necessarily shifts the focus from content (OER) to practices (OEP) that are necessary for the use of that content (Mackey & Jacobson, 2011, p. 62; cf. Weller, 2011). We argue that the beliefs and values associated with Bildung – including autonomy, critical reflection, inclusivity and the rejection of universal narratives – are suitable for providing a theoretical framework for open education as well as providing a critical lens through which to assess contemporary educational models in practice (e.g. Liessmann, 2006)

<i>Bildung</i> as a critical foundation for Open Education

Despite the recent increases of interest in Open Education (notably in the Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC; Fini, 2009) it has been continuously asserted that Open Education lacks a philosophical or theoretical foundation (Vandenberg, 1975). Similar accusations have been made with respect to distance education, which some have identified as being slow to engage with critical debates in theory and research (Evans & Nation, 1992). In a similar vein, Danaher, Wyer and Bartlett (1998) claim that researchers in open and distance learning tend to draw on too narrow a range of theoretical resources in their research. Given the considerable rise of Open Education over the last years, these critical appraisals urge us to expand theoretical approaches to refine our understanding of evolving pedagogical and technological relations (cf. Bell, 2011). In this paper, we contribute to debates surrounding open education and open educational resources by introducing the concept of Bildung (self-cultivation; self-realization) as a powerful reflective tool. We will elaborate on the potentials of Bildung by reviewing the history of the concept and exploring the extent to which Bildung can provide open education with a theoretical framework. Our focus here will not be exclusively on open educational resources (OER): it will be stressed that ‘openness’ in education necessarily shifts the focus from content (OER) to practices (OEP) that are necessary for the use of that content (Mackey & Jacobson, 2011, p. 62; cf. Weller, 2011). We argue (1) that there are significant potentials to elicit or encourage Bildung through the use of OER, such as through providing open access to a rich base of materials from various cultural contexts. In this process of engaging with multiple and complex resources it can be assumed that a transformation of the way in which the individual is approaching learning is likely to happen. The reflections of these experiences are educational and a key factor for the theoretical underpinning of OER. We go on to suggest (2) that the beliefs and values associated with Bildung – including autonomy, critical reflection, inclusivity and the rejection of universal narratives – are suitable for providing a theoretical framework for OER as well as providing a critical lens through which to assess contemporary educational models in practice (e.g. Liessmann, 2006)

Entwicklung und Erprobung eines volitionalen Designmodells

Bedingt durch die stetig wachsende Komplexität in unserer heutigen post-industriellen Gesellschaft steigen auch die Anforderungen an Lerner (Schüler, Auszubildende, Studierende etc.). Umschrieben werden diese Anforderungen mit Schlagworten wie „lebenslanges Lernen“ oder „selbstgesteuertes Lernen“. Gefordert wird somit, sich rasch und möglichst selbstständig neues Wissen anzueignen. Instructional Design (ID), eine technologische Teildisziplin der Erziehungswissenschaft, nimmt sich seit den 1950er Jahren intensiv solcher Fragestellungen an. ID entwickelt Verfahren und Modelle, die effiziente und effektive Lehr-Lernprozesse ermöglichen. Allerdings offenbart eine kritische Durchsicht von ID-Modellen, dass eine zentrale psychologische Variable bei der Gestaltung von Lernumgebungen unberücksichtigt bleibt. Dabei handelt es sich um den Willen, oder Volition, der es dem Menschen ermöglicht, entgegen seiner aktuellen Wünsche und Bedürfnisse zu handeln. Volition spielt daher gerade bei Formen selbstgesteuerten Lernens eine entscheidende Rolle, da hier der Lerner selbst bestimmen kann und muss, wann, wo und wie viel er lernen will. Es liegen mittlerweile eine Reihe volitionaler Theorien und Modelle vor, die Anleitungen geben, wie Prozesse der Selbststeuerung zu fördern sind. Jedoch sind diese bislang nicht systematisch (d.h. entsprechend den Prinzipien von ID) aufbereitet und in ein kohärentes Modell integriert worden. Die Entwicklung und Erprobung eines volitionalen Designmodells ist somit die Zielsetzung meiner Dissertation. Für die Entwicklung habe ich auf ein gut erprobtes ID-Modell zurückgegriffen, das ARCS-Modell von John Keller. Dieses beinhaltet vier motivationale Komponenten: Aufmerksamkeit, Relevanz, Zuversicht und Zufriedenheit, die für einen zielgerichteten Lernprozess eine wichtige Rolle spielen. Allerdings können sich selbst bei einer solch motivierenden Lernumgebung Schwierigkeiten im Lernverlauf einstellen. So z.B. dann, wenn Ziele nicht angemessen formuliert wurden oder unerwartet Schwierigkeiten auftreten. Mit Hilfe volitionaler Strategien kann Lernenden geholfen werden, Schwierigkeiten und Hindernisse zu bewältigen. Zur Identifikation relevanter volitionaler Strategien wurde die einschlägige Literatur und die folgenden Ansätze herangezogen: Handlungskontrolltheorie (Kuhl), Rubikonmodell der Handlungsphasen (Heckhausen, Gollwitzer), Implementation Intentions (Gollwitzer) und absichtsvolles Üben (Ericsson, Krampe, & Tesch-Roemer). Diese werden in ein prozessorientiertes Modell integriert, das zentrale motivationale und volitionale Wirkmechanismen formuliert. Darüber hinaus wird in einem designorientierten Modell beschrieben, welche Schritte bei der Entwicklung und Gestaltung einer motivational/volitional anregenden Lernumgebung zu befolgen sind. Dieser Entwicklungsprozess wurde in einer Studie an der Florida State University empirisch erprobt. Es zeigte sich, dass volitionale Strategien einen großen Einfluss hinsichtlich eines erfolgreichen Lernprozesses haben. So verbesserten sich Versuchspersonen, die Email Botschaften mit motivationalen und volitionalen Strategien erhielten, signifikant in ihren Leistungen im Unterschied zu Probanden, die keine Strategien bekamen. Auch lernten Studierende aufgrund der Strategien signifikant mehr. Weitere Forschung zur Validierung und Optimierung des volitionalen Designmodells ist in Planung. Neben Einsatzfeldern wie in der erwähnten Studie sollen dabei auch Bereiche der Aus- und Weiterbildung berücksichtigt werden.Due to a continuing decrease of complexity within our post-industrial society the de-mands with which learning process are confronted are rising, too. Theses demands are being summarised as “life-long learning” or “self-regulated learning”. Basically they are targeted on the ability to quickly and constantly updated one’ own knowledge base. Instructional Design (ID), a technologically-oriented sub discipline of educational sci-ence, is ¬ beginning in the 1950ies – has intensively been working on such issues. ID has developed procedures and models in order to foster efficient and effective teaching and learning processes. However, a critical review of those models reveals that one of the central psychological variables is missing: Volition or action control, respectively. Volition empowers the person to act against his/her current intentions or needs and is thus playing a crucial role in forms of self-regulated learning. Since the learner is his/her own teacher, he/her has to decide when, what, where to learn. Therefore, moti-vation oftentimes fluctuates with possible downside risks for the learning process. In this regard, a powerful support of major psychological states (emotion, motivation, cognition) is given within volitional theories. There are numerous volitional ap-proaches which, however, have not yet been integrated into a comprehensive frame-work of reference. Therefore, my dissertation is aimed at developing and empirically examining a volitional design model. In order to do so, I have reverted to a theoretically and empirically validated ID-model, the ARCS model by John Keller. It contains four motivational components (at-tention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction) which are important for successful and goal-oriented learning. However, even such as motivationally-enhanced learning environment does not prevent potential risks for learners’ motivation such as deflec-tions or obstacles. Moreover, if learning objects are not clearly stated learners can get confused and demotivated. By means of volitional strategies learners are equipped to overcome obstacles and difficulties and are thus able to sustain their motivation. With regard to identify relevant volitional models I have undertaken a comprehensive litera-ture review which led to the following approaches: Rubicon model (Heckhausen, Gollwitzer), action control theory (Kuhl), implementation intentions (Gollwitzer), and deliberate practice/studying (Ericcson et al.). They are being integrated into a compre-hensive framework which postulates major functions of motivation and volition. Moreover, a volitional design approach has been developed for giving guidelines to instructional designers and educators. In a first exploratory study conducted at Florida State University positive trends of a volitional-enhanced learning environment could be revealed. Subjects who were ad-ministered volitional strategies via email showed significant improvements in terms of knowledge acquisition, amount of learning time, and motivation

Entwicklung und Erprobung eines volitionalen Designmodells

Bedingt durch die stetig wachsende Komplexität in unserer heutigen post-industriellen Gesellschaft steigen auch die Anforderungen an Lerner (Schüler, Auszubildende, Studierende etc.). Umschrieben werden diese Anforderungen mit Schlagworten wie „lebenslanges Lernen“ oder „selbstgesteuertes Lernen“. Gefordert wird somit, sich rasch und möglichst selbstständig neues Wissen anzueignen. Instructional Design (ID), eine technologische Teildisziplin der Erziehungswissenschaft, nimmt sich seit den 1950er Jahren intensiv solcher Fragestellungen an. ID entwickelt Verfahren und Modelle, die effiziente und effektive Lehr-Lernprozesse ermöglichen. Allerdings offenbart eine kritische Durchsicht von ID-Modellen, dass eine zentrale psychologische Variable bei der Gestaltung von Lernumgebungen unberücksichtigt bleibt. Dabei handelt es sich um den Willen, oder Volition, der es dem Menschen ermöglicht, entgegen seiner aktuellen Wünsche und Bedürfnisse zu handeln. Volition spielt daher gerade bei Formen selbstgesteuerten Lernens eine entscheidende Rolle, da hier der Lerner selbst bestimmen kann und muss, wann, wo und wie viel er lernen will. Es liegen mittlerweile eine Reihe volitionaler Theorien und Modelle vor, die Anleitungen geben, wie Prozesse der Selbststeuerung zu fördern sind. Jedoch sind diese bislang nicht systematisch (d.h. entsprechend den Prinzipien von ID) aufbereitet und in ein kohärentes Modell integriert worden. Die Entwicklung und Erprobung eines volitionalen Designmodells ist somit die Zielsetzung meiner Dissertation. Für die Entwicklung habe ich auf ein gut erprobtes ID-Modell zurückgegriffen, das ARCS-Modell von John Keller. Dieses beinhaltet vier motivationale Komponenten: Aufmerksamkeit, Relevanz, Zuversicht und Zufriedenheit, die für einen zielgerichteten Lernprozess eine wichtige Rolle spielen. Allerdings können sich selbst bei einer solch motivierenden Lernumgebung Schwierigkeiten im Lernverlauf einstellen. So z.B. dann, wenn Ziele nicht angemessen formuliert wurden oder unerwartet Schwierigkeiten auftreten. Mit Hilfe volitionaler Strategien kann Lernenden geholfen werden, Schwierigkeiten und Hindernisse zu bewältigen. Zur Identifikation relevanter volitionaler Strategien wurde die einschlägige Literatur und die folgenden Ansätze herangezogen: Handlungskontrolltheorie (Kuhl), Rubikonmodell der Handlungsphasen (Heckhausen, Gollwitzer), Implementation Intentions (Gollwitzer) und absichtsvolles Üben (Ericsson, Krampe, & Tesch-Roemer). Diese werden in ein prozessorientiertes Modell integriert, das zentrale motivationale und volitionale Wirkmechanismen formuliert. Darüber hinaus wird in einem designorientierten Modell beschrieben, welche Schritte bei der Entwicklung und Gestaltung einer motivational/volitional anregenden Lernumgebung zu befolgen sind. Dieser Entwicklungsprozess wurde in einer Studie an der Florida State University empirisch erprobt. Es zeigte sich, dass volitionale Strategien einen großen Einfluss hinsichtlich eines erfolgreichen Lernprozesses haben. So verbesserten sich Versuchspersonen, die Email Botschaften mit motivationalen und volitionalen Strategien erhielten, signifikant in ihren Leistungen im Unterschied zu Probanden, die keine Strategien bekamen. Auch lernten Studierende aufgrund der Strategien signifikant mehr. Weitere Forschung zur Validierung und Optimierung des volitionalen Designmodells ist in Planung. Neben Einsatzfeldern wie in der erwähnten Studie sollen dabei auch Bereiche der Aus- und Weiterbildung berücksichtigt werden.Due to a continuing decrease of complexity within our post-industrial society the de-mands with which learning process are confronted are rising, too. Theses demands are being summarised as “life-long learning” or “self-regulated learning”. Basically they are targeted on the ability to quickly and constantly updated one’ own knowledge base. Instructional Design (ID), a technologically-oriented sub discipline of educational sci-ence, is ¬ beginning in the 1950ies – has intensively been working on such issues. ID has developed procedures and models in order to foster efficient and effective teaching and learning processes. However, a critical review of those models reveals that one of the central psychological variables is missing: Volition or action control, respectively. Volition empowers the person to act against his/her current intentions or needs and is thus playing a crucial role in forms of self-regulated learning. Since the learner is his/her own teacher, he/her has to decide when, what, where to learn. Therefore, moti-vation oftentimes fluctuates with possible downside risks for the learning process. In this regard, a powerful support of major psychological states (emotion, motivation, cognition) is given within volitional theories. There are numerous volitional ap-proaches which, however, have not yet been integrated into a comprehensive frame-work of reference. Therefore, my dissertation is aimed at developing and empirically examining a volitional design model. In order to do so, I have reverted to a theoretically and empirically validated ID-model, the ARCS model by John Keller. It contains four motivational components (at-tention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction) which are important for successful and goal-oriented learning. However, even such as motivationally-enhanced learning environment does not prevent potential risks for learners’ motivation such as deflec-tions or obstacles. Moreover, if learning objects are not clearly stated learners can get confused and demotivated. By means of volitional strategies learners are equipped to overcome obstacles and difficulties and are thus able to sustain their motivation. With regard to identify relevant volitional models I have undertaken a comprehensive litera-ture review which led to the following approaches: Rubicon model (Heckhausen, Gollwitzer), action control theory (Kuhl), implementation intentions (Gollwitzer), and deliberate practice/studying (Ericcson et al.). They are being integrated into a compre-hensive framework which postulates major functions of motivation and volition. Moreover, a volitional design approach has been developed for giving guidelines to instructional designers and educators. In a first exploratory study conducted at Florida State University positive trends of a volitional-enhanced learning environment could be revealed. Subjects who were ad-ministered volitional strategies via email showed significant improvements in terms of knowledge acquisition, amount of learning time, and motivation

Digitalisierung von Hochschule und Hochschulbildung. Muster, Grammatik und Mythen

Die Digitalisierung hat die Hochschulbildung verändert, aber nicht in dem Maße, wie es erwartet wurde. In diesem Artikel untersucht der Autor, welche Muster und Mythen die Entwicklung von E-Learning an deutschen Hochschulen in den letzten 20 Jahren geprägt haben und wie sich diese auf das Verständnis und das Verhältnis von Pädagogik und Technik auswirken. Er kommt zu dem Schluss, dass eine kritisch-konstruktive Gestaltung von Bildung im digitalen Zeitalter notwendig ist, um den Erwartungshorizont zu verändern und eine erfolgreiche Digitalisierung zu erreichen. (Herausgeber)Digitization has changed higher education, but not to the extent that was expected. In this article, the author examines the patterns and myths that have shaped the development of e-learning in German universities over the past 20 years and how these have affected the understanding and relationship between pedagogy and technology. He concludes that a critical-constructive design of education in the digital age is necessary to change the horizon of expectations and to achieve successful digitization. (Editor