How do multimodal concept maps

1. Christina PrestonInternational Doctorate in EducationFaculty of Culture and PedagogyDepartment of Learning, Curriculum and Culture How do multimodal concept maps provide insights into teachers’ priorities in a digital technologies CPD context?

2. Questions for your consideration Draft, 40,000 Ed.D. Professional study Chapter One Research question and literature survey Chapter Two The research design and tools Chapter Three The control group: information transmission international computer-based training Chapter Four Cohort one: mentored constructive action-based research between England and South Africa Chapter Five Cohort Two: social interactional practice-based research in England (that includes members of my CoP) Chapter Six Conclusions that compare the results from the three cohorts (and includes the observations of the co-researchers who have published in this area).

3. Your advice in this seminar …. Background to the study Appeal of the maps Research questions Data collection Quantitative analysis by number Qualitative analysis by word Qualitative analysis by sign Unexpected data The role of the researcher Recommendations to the researcher Further research Where to stop?

4. The background to the study

5. Despite the complexity of pedagogical practice, and indeed as a result of its interdependence with the regulatory frameworks of the national community, there is very strong evidence that innovation in pedagogy can be introduced rapidly if they are tied to changes in what is assessed. B. Somekh (2007) Pedagogy and Learning with ICT Routledge Oxford p.42

6. My professional practice-based research

7. Impact2 (2002) Becta Mavers, M., B. Somekh, et al. (2002). "Interpreting the externalised images of pupils' conceptions of ICT: methods for the analysis of concept maps." Computers and Education 38: pp 187-207.

8. Impact2 (2002) Becta Mavers, M., B. Somekh, et al. (2002). "Interpreting the externalised images of pupils' conceptions of ICT: methods for the analysis of concept maps." Computers and Education 38: pp 187-207.

9. The appeal of MCM ‘Fascinating cultural artifacts’ Mavers 2002

10. First map Amy CBT Amy ECDL ICT skills course:Amy ECDL ICT skills course: Figure Two Before Figure Two After

11. Second map Amy CBT Amy ECDL ICT skills course:Amy ECDL ICT skills course: Figure Two Before Figure Two After

12. First map : Tom CBT

13. Second map : Tom CBT Bill ECDL ICT skills course: Figure Three After

14. The research questions

15. The research question Can semiotic theory increase insights into teachers’ priorities as illustrated in MCM produced in the context of ICT CPD? The three sub-questions are: In which ways do MCM scoring techniques provide insights into teachers’ priorities about digital technologies? In which ways does the labelling of nodes in MCM provide insights into teachers’ priorities about digital technologies? In which ways does the analysis of sign-making in MCM provide insights into teachers’ priorities about digital technologies?

16. The themes emerging from the grounded research study, the attendant literature and my practice The varied ways in which teachers’ MCM design reflects the cognitive theory that underpins their CPD programme How the interpretation of learning quality illustrated by the MCM is affected by the multiple roles of the researcher and the co-researchers

17. Data collection 2003 -2006 • 52 pairs of multimodal concept maps (MCM) (from international collection of 250) • all map-makers were self-declared ‘advisors’ (teaching other teachers) • all pairs collected at the beginning and end of a one year course in digital technologies • same main question reworked from Impact2How do computers impact on your personal and professional life?• same procedures reworked from Impact220 minutes, pen and paper

18. Data collection 2003 -2006 Three cohorts Control group (CBT) x 18 ‘advisory’ teachers taking an international computer based training course (CBT) based on information transmission (selected from 100)First cohort (MAR) x15 ‘advisory’ teachers working in one province in South Africa taking a MirandaNet mentored action research (MAR) CPD programme based on constructive learning (selected from 30)Second cohort (SCoP)19 ‘advisory’ in England at the IOE taking a MirandaNet designed a scholarly community of practice CPD programme based on social interaction (selected from 25) Some were also members and co-researchers in the CoP, MirandaNet).

19. Tools for semiotic analysis of the MCM Number : quantitative scores • connectivity scoring method from Impact2 showing cognitive activity • new activity score presenting accumulation of concepts Word: qualitative content analysis • Score sheet developed Impact2 headings that concentrated on basic computer concepts, concrete and abstract • Transcript analysis that establishes learning processes adapted from Daly and Pachler (2007) establishes the map makers in SCoP as co-researchers Word: qualitative content analysis Semiotic framework developed from the work of Jewitt, Kress, Mavers, Somekh, Van Leeuwen (with words included as one element of the analysis)

20. Theme one: the cognitive theory underpinning the three CPD programmes (Pachler 2005) Information transmission: learning concepts to reproduce for a test Constructive learning: mentored action based research Social interaction: sharing practice based research in a CoP that continues beyond the end of a course with the intention of changing practice and policy Theme two : the perspective of the researcher (Adler and Adler 1987) Peripheral member researcher Active member researcher Complete member researcher / CoP co-researchers

21. Quantitative analysisby number

22. Impact2 Method One 8 8 = 1:1 ratio Quantitative analysis Marton 1994,Marton and Booth1997, Pearson and Somekh 2000, Mavers, Somekh, Rosterick 2002 (4,000 maps)

23. SCoP group: Table of connectivity and activity scores

24. Figure 5.2.b. Chart of ScoP connectivity scores Figure 5.2.c. Chart of ScoP activity scores

25. 2 cohorts of x20 teachers who had good IT skills Significant differences between the cohorts in cognitive activity Draft charts

26. Neil’s first map

27. Second map Neil

28. …Talking about mess… no drawings, there are absolutely no drawings on this because I tend to concentrate on maps for developing linguistic skills. I’ve been doing mapping for a very long time and teaching the children how to map so it becomes almost second nature,… From Bloom’s perspective, my first map is overcomplicated, difficult to read and inadequate in categorising the concepts to prove higher order thinking. In the second map, therefore, I have consciously used the affordances of digital mapping to refine and categorise my ideas to illustrate higher order thinking. Neil: long term member of MirandaNet and expert practice based research mapper

29. Tentative conclusions about MCM Interesting results for groups if you are working as a peripheral researcher (PMR) but only tells you about qualitity of connections not quality But inconsistent when individual scores are considered…. Professional peripheral researchers may still want to adapt scoring techniques to follow patterns of behaviour in one parameter…. But for classroom practice based researchers the numbers too small, techniques too time-consuming… Although discussions about the scores between the learners might be profitable….they will require triangulation with other methods If relying on scores it seems necessary to teach mapping first, like Novak, and explain how the formulas are being used. Impact2 side-stepped this issue by interviewing the map makers…

30. Qualitative analysisWord

31. Impact 2 Method Two Qualitative analysis Signs and words Score sheet establishing frequency of concepts across a group Spheres of Thinking Uses of computers Abstract thoughts about computers Zones of Use

32. Greatest gain Greatest gain The SCoP group contentanalysis

33. Results: the same analysis of the signs?

34. WordsTentative conclusions A researchers find what they are looking for! CPD programme content Concrete and abstract concepts related to what is known. Very useful for needs analysis. Surprising what was known before the course started. Also indicated different nature of cohorts that were superficially ‘advisors’. The cognitive theory underpinning the CPD programme Daly and Pachler (2007) - social interaction with teachers (MTeach) Manifest and latent concepts about learning process are valued in words for the tutor. cognition autobiography knowledge construction (constructivism) meta-learning community (social interaction)

35. Signs(with words as one semiotic unit)

36. The framework criteria Information Transmission Concepts: graphic and words Modalities Materiality of Meaning Dimensionality Constructive learning process (autobiography) Compositional elements and their interrelations Narratives Affectual and ludic qualities Dynamics Social interaction process Representations and interaction between the map maker, audience/viewer (and co-researcher)

37. Fascinating opportunity for researchers, tutors, practice-based researchers, and co-researchers • to view a snapshot of a learner’s priorities at one point in time• to deduce how those priorities might merge with those of the tutor• to increase skills in organising and communicating concepts • to benefit those who are digitally literate • to offer an innovative means of assessment of and for learning • to act as a scaffold in conversations with and between learners about learning progress over a period of time • to act as a scaffold for promoting social interaction Suggestions for researchers: • decide to teach mapping first, or not • develop data collection procedures about graphics, digital maps, collaborative maps and remotely web maps • avoid scoring…… SignsTentative conclusions

38. Adjusting the semiotic framework? Information Transmission Concepts: graphics and words Modalities Materiality of Meaning Dimensionality Constructivism (autobiography) Compositional elements and their interrelations Narratives Affectual and ludic qualities Dynamics Social interaction (add Daly and Pachler elements) Representations and interaction between the map maker, audience/viewer (and co-researcher) Dynamics? Compositional elements and their interrelations? N.B. Only one collaborative map by accident and one digital map

39. Adding to the framework for semiotic analysis in terms of constructive learning and social interaction??

40. Adding to the framework for semiotic analysis? Constructive learning and social interaction Somekh and Pearson (2003-2006) - PERLS - with young learners A theory of transformatory learning mediated by context Learning creatively Learning as an active citizen (not quite community) Engaging powerfully with new ideas Reflecting on own learning

41. Social interaction and learningThe unexpected…..

42. The unexpected…..The pain of learning….

43. Malcolm : anxiety and concern

44. Malcolm : the ‘fun’ narrative%urse: Figure Nine Before

46. The unexpected…..The power of collaborative theory development

47. Malcolm and other co-researchers: a scholarly contribution to e-learning theory en After

48. The unexpected….. A practitioner and an academic journal volume about MCM

49. Who are the researchers? Who are the learners? CBT : Peripheral member researcher only Evaluated a course designed, taught and tested by three different groups MAR: Active member researcher only Involved for the duration of the CPD as a member of a MN team: designer, tutor of tutors, mentor of action research, evaluator and researcher SCoP : Complete member researcher During CPD as a member of a MN team: designer, tutor of tutors, mentor of action research, marker, evaluator and researcher. But…. Involved course members as map makers and co-researchers who provided evidence from a valuable perspective One group develop a MCM to explain e-learning theory based on their practice based evidence Beyond duration Involved in MirandaNet Fellowship MCM working parties and publications that have influenced me

50. Further research work Further development of analysis criteria to explore evidence of learning processes the uses of the MCM for assessment for learning for individuals and groups the value of collaborative and digital mapping the potential for internal and external assessment