290 likes | 510 Views
Program of the workshop. Background of the projectOverview of the lesson seriesHands on: inquiry learningHands on: (observation of) writing activitiesDiscussion of experiences. Hypertext. Digital text in which information is organized as a network and in which text blocks are connected via hyp
E N D
1. Hypertext writing, observational learning, and inquiry learning as supplementary teaching methods Martine Braaksma, Gert Rijlaarsdam & Michel Couzijn
Graduate School of Teaching and Learning, University of Amsterdam
2. Program of the workshop Background of the project
Overview of the lesson series
Hands on: inquiry learning
Hands on: (observation of) writing activities
Discussion of experiences
3. Hypertext “Digital text in which information is organized as a network and in which text blocks are connected via hyperlinks
4. For instance Texts on the Internet en encyclopedias on CD ROM
5. Some examples of hypertexts
6. Examples (continued)
7. Effects of hypertext writing versus linear writing on: Writing skills
Content knowledge
8. Hypertext writing Beneficial effects on:
Writing skills (writing processes and text quality):
Hypertext writing: students learn to cope with linearization process
Hypertext writing: more planning and analysis than linear writing
More planning & analysis = better product quality of hypertext and linear text
Content knowledge (topic of writing):
Hypertext writing: more knowledge transforming activities
9. Extra didactic intervention: Observational learning Instead of writing themselves
Learning from other writers at work (models)
Different aspects of writing are focused on (e.g., starting, thinking of arguments, thinking of a title, revising)
So: three comparisons:
Linear writing
Hypertext writing
Observational learning (observation of (hypertext) writing activities)
10. Overview of the project Study 1. Construction study: developing and testing of lesson series and testing materials & effects of HYP versus LIN on writing skills and content knowledge
Study 2. Process study: learning and writing processes during HYP and LIN writing. Process are logged and recorded on video (TA’s): Insight into processes during LIN and HYP writing & materials as input for study 3.
Study 3. Experimental study: comparison of three conditions: Observational learning (OBS), HYP and LIN on writing skills and content knowledge
11. Design
12. Main overview lesson series Five lessons (about 60 minutes each) on writing argumentative texts
Three conditions (HYP, LIN and OBS)
All activities in class, no homework
Theme: ‘good charities’, issue about connection commercial lotteries and good charities, documentation provided
First 2 lessons, focus on content knowledge
based on ‘inquiry learning’ (Hillocks, 1986)
exactly the same for the three conditions
Lesson 3-5: same learning activities, but writing in HYP, LIN or OBS-format
13. Inquiry learning No providing of knowledge by the teacher
Students discover knowledge themselves
Active interaction with subject
Focus on criteria development, formulation of definitions
14. Main focus in lessons
15. Hands on: Inquiry learning Good charities cards
Writing a definition
Evaluation of experiences
A look at the ‘jury game’
16. Hands on: (Hypertext) writing and observational learning Observation of hypertext writing
Observation of thinking of a title
Evaluation of experiences
A look at the final writing instruction
17. Discussion Experiences during hands on and/or own experiences
Questions, suggestions
Implementation in own lessons?
18. More information Lesson materials, research plan, pictures, examples hypertexts, slides at:
http://www.ilo.uva.nl/homepages/martine.htm
Email: braaksma@uva.nl
19. Some examples of Observational learning Observation of two students (Floor and Toon) who are thinking of a title of their text
Instruction: observe Floor and Toon and compare their performances:
Toon / Floor performed better / less well
Clarify your answer: …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
20. Some results Study 1: Effects of HYP versus LIN on writing skills and content knowledge (N = 105)
Study 2: Differences between HYP and LIN writing processes (N=18)
Study 3: Effects of HYP, OBS and LIN on writing skills and content knowledge (N = 139). Data analysis in progress
21. Study 1: Effects on Text Quality (NB of a linear text) Global Text Quality (school mark between 0-10), based on requirements that were presented to the students, e.g.,
Goal of the text
Attractiveness
Awareness of the reader
22. Results study 1: Effects on global Text Quality
23. Study 1: Effects on Content Knowledge (concept map) Quantitative aspects
number of concepts and relations
hierarchy of concepts (number of levels)
Qualitative aspects
level of abstraction (categorization of concepts)
variance (different aspects of topic)
24. Example of a concept map
25. Results study 1: Effects on content knowledge No differences on post-test between conditions on qualitative & quantitative aspects (with pre-test as covariate)
No interaction with aptitude
For study 3: new measurement of content knowledge. Questionnaire which is more focused to issue / writing topic. Mc questions, true/not true questions and three open questions.
26. Study 2. Differences between HYP and LIN writing: ‘Text measures’
27. Study 2. Differences between HYP and LIN writing: ‘Process measures’
28. Study 2. Differences between HYP and LIN writing: ‘Process measures’
29. Discussion study 2 Different process characteristics for hypertext writing and linear writing
HYP: + sentences, paragraphs, writing time
More fluent writing, due to argumentation structure = document structure?
LIN: + pausing time, longer pauses
Involved in linearization process, formulation of linguistic indicators/connectives?
30. Argumentation structure