1
Students’ use of Video-Triggers in a
Data-Based Discussion-Board
Assistant Professor Kristin Holte Haug
Faculty of Education, Oslo University College Postbox 4 St. Olavs plass, N-0130 Oslo , Norway
Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, University College Dublin, 7-10 September 2005
______
Introduction
Norway was represented in Bologna in 1999, when ministers of education of 29 countries met to discuss the future development of higher education in Europe. The post-summit declaration issued by the ministers,The Bologna Declaration, expressed the goal of developing a European Higher Education Area by 2010 (UFD, 2005a). Norway has followed upthe process - The Bologna Process - as it is known, and is one of 40 countries that are represented in the process today[1].
The national reports (UFD, 2005b) show that the participating countries have followed up the Bologna Process in variable degree and have implemented different elements. In Norway, the Bologna Process has been implemented through the Quality Reform, which was implemented at all higher education institutions in Norway, effective from the autumn of 2003. The changes introduced by the Quality Reform largely follow up or reflect the Bologna Process. Key aspects of the reform are the introduction of a new degree structure with bachelor's and master's degrees, the Diploma Supplement and the introductionof credits based on the ECTS model (European Credit Transfer System). The establishment of NOKUT (the Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education), and improved quality assurance at the institutional level also mirror the objectives of the Bologna Process. In addition, scope for student exchange is to be improved (UFD, 2005a).
One aspect of the Quality Reform concerns study methods, and gives priority to a combination of teaching methods involving a high level of student activity. There is strong emphasis on Information and Communication Technology (ICT) throughout the whole Norwegian education sector. According to the Ministry of Education and Research (UFD), the purpose of ICT is to contribute to a system of education that develops ICT and uses it as a subject and a tool, in the way it is being organized, applied and used educationally. ICT in higher education in Norway is therefore considered as an important instrument to give quality and efficiency in the learning environment (KUF 2001), and there are several ongoing studies aimed to explore and to bring knowledge to this field (see e.g. Norway Opening Universities, 2005).
This paper deals with the use of ICT in students’ learning processes at the Faculty of Education at Oslo University College (OUC). Acase study on the students’ use ofa data-based applicationconsisting of a discussion-board with an integrated video-displaywill be focused. The data-application developed for this purpose isnamedHerme 1.1. The aim is to present the data we acquired when a group of students enrolled in an international course, Aesthetics of Daily Life[2], started to usea new electronic medium as a part of their learning process in a project called Urban Aesthetics[3].
In the first part of the paper I will present my research question,place the study within a theoretical framework and present the method for collecting data. I will also comment briefly on the terms video-trigger and discussion-board, before presenting the data-application the students’ used in their project work.In the second part I will introduce you to the professional context in which the students used the data-application, before I present and discuss the empirical data. Preliminary conclusions about the application’s impact on the students’ learning potential will be drawn in the end.
Research question and theoretical frame
My research question in this study was: How do students take video-triggers integrated in a discussion-board into use and which effect does such an application have on the students’ learning potential? This paper will focus on questions such as: How did the students take Herme 1.1 into use? Did the application enhance meta-discussions among the students? Did the application have any effect on the students’ creativity in their work process?
This case-study’s theoretical framework is social constructivism andcultural-historical theory initiated by Lev Vygotsky (1978) who emphasizes the influences of cultural and social contexts in learning, and supports a discovery model of learning. Vygotsky’s concept Zone of proximal development (ibid) and the concept schaffolding(Wood, et al. 1976) are appropriate to understand and to analyse the processes which took place in the project presented in this paper. The concept zone of proximal development(ZPD) is explained as the distance between a child’s level of development which appears as independent problem solving, and the levelwhere further development could take place through problem solving under the guidance from an adult, or in cooperating with more capable peers (Vygotsky 1978:86).Wood(Wood, et al. 1976) use the metaphor schaffoldingto express the support within the ZPD concerning the process where the student and his teacher or a more captive fellow student together build a scaffold, which gradually is removed while the student constructs his knowledge.
In the project Urban Aesthetics the change between the individual and the collective production of knowledge was very visible. E.g. the individual student collected information from articles, books and internet. He adapted the information and brought his understanding to his fellow students by publishing a trigger and posting a comment concerning his finds at the discussion-board. Further, his fellow students responded to the first student’s trigger and individual comment, and they also published their own triggers along with written comments. This activity caused a collective discussion from which the individual students adapted new knowledge. Therefore, individual knowledge turned in to collective knowledge and vice versa.
Methodology and research perspectives
During a two weeks period in the spring term 2004I closely followed a group of three studentsin the project Urban Aesthetics.In the beginning of the project period the students were given information about the application and possible ways of using it. I made clear my hypothesis that use of video in the learning process may create a richer, and maybe a better learning environment. The students were told that a short video-clip could function as a trigger for learning and that such a trigger could increase professional curiosity. Further, I mentioned that the use of triggers could function as a motivation, and make the students investigate more about their research question.
In order to participate in the project the students had to meet the following conditions:First of all, they had to feel comfortable to use a computer. This means that they had to be familiar with the basic technical functions and to the use of internet. As the studentshad to write contributions to a discussion-board as a part of the project, it was an advantage, but not a necessity, to have experiences with chat and discussion-boards. Further, they should bewilling to participate in short videos,and to dovideo records themselves. This includedparticipation in aone hour course in video-editing. At last, they had to participate in a one hour group interview after the project Urban Aesthetics was finished.
The data in the research project was collected by participating observation, logbook and as written above, a group interview. The data-material also consisted of a number of video-triggers produced during the project period, and a number of written contributions at the discussion-board. Due to my function as both a lecturer on the course, and the current group’s supervisor, I had the opportunity to discuss the application continuously with the students, not only during the project period, but during the whole course, and in this way I received valuable information.
In addition to a few video-records I did from the discussions among the students during their work, my functionwas to participate in the project as co-tutor in one group together with another teacher, who was supposed to be an expert on the group’s chosen topic. My main tasks and responsibility were to give technical support and to give advice on how the group could use video-triggers as a medium and a support to the learning environmentof the current project.
Core terms and definitions
A discussion board is probably well known to teachers and students in higher education. It is the channel for asynchronous communication that we find in most virtual learning environments (VLE), e.g. Black Board, It’s Learning and Class Fronter. Students’ active use of such discussion-boards as a part of their learning environment, e.g. through giving peer-responses, has been reported as a helpful tool to enhance the students’ activity, commitment and responsibility in their learning processes, and as valuable in order to enhance their learning potential (Dysthe, 1995, 1999, Holte Haug, 2004, 2005a, 2005b). According to Dysthe, learning potential is a suitable concept to describe the students’ possibilities for learning. Although, the concept does not say anything about what the students actually have learned, according to Dysthe, that is a much more complicated matter.
It may not be possible to test what each student actually learns from a particular interaction (…), but it is possible to analyze aspects of both the interaction patterns and the development of the content, and on the basis of this, make assertions about the learning potential in the particular activity. To what degree each student actually avails herself of this potential for learning is determined by contextual and personal factors which defy analysis (Dysthe, 1999:3).
What is a video-trigger, then?In an educational context a video-trigger can be described as an introduction or a starterto a specific topic which can stimulate the students’ interest, curiosity and motivation for the topics to be illuminated. A trigger or a starter gives no answer or solution to a specific question or problem, the trigger’s prime function is to stimulate discussion among the students, and to obtain relevant information and knowledge on the topic.
Eeg-Larsen (2004) claims, that educational use of video-triggers may help the students to shed light on professional questions and inquiries from different angels. As a result of this learning process, parallel solutions will occur.According to Eeg-Larsen (ibid) a video-trigger is a:
…student active teaching aid which helps the students to find answers to the questions they are presented. With reference to the Socrates’ dialogs, the following questions could be raised: “What is the problem? What do we know about the topic? What further knowledge is required? What do we understand? What needs further investigation?” The students are not supposed to acquire new knowledge from the video-trigger itself. It is in the following dialog between the students, and between the students and their teacher or tutor new knowledge is constructed.
One student reflected on video-triggers as follows:
What can be used as a trigger? Definitely everything! Not only video-clips, but pictures, sound-clips, drawings, etc... I think the most difficult part is to make a good and interesting trigger…A trigger that really trigs…
Thedata-application Herme 1.1was developed in 2003-04 as a result of a collective work in a project called PedIT (Educational use of Information Technology) at OUC, during 2003-2004 (Høivik 2005, PUS, 2005). Herme 1.1 consists of a data-based discussion-board with an integratedvideo-display. The application gives the students the opportunity to watch the video-trigger, to respond to the trigger, and to discuss the trigger’s content with other students, all on the same web-site. Such use of video-triggers represents an approach where students have to act as professionals and confront challenging situations and problems as they occur, situations with fuzzy edges, insufficient information, and with a need to determine the best solution possible.
Illustration1:The website contains a discussion-board and a display for playing the videos. On the frame’s left hand side we see a hyperlinked list of video titles. The student chooses a video, and the moment a certain video is chosen, a short description of the video appears along with an introduction, an assignment or questions related to the topic of the chosen video (on the frame’s right hand side). Connected to the display is a consol which allows the student to start, pause and stop the video whenever needed. The student also has the possibility to enlarge the video display. The video can be watched over and over again. In the frame’s lower part we see the discussion-board. When the student is ready for it, he writes his comments on the chosen video, and posts it at the discussion-board. On the same website, the student also has the possibility to reply to comments already posted by his fellow students to the specific trigger.
Presentation of empirical data and discussion
According to the study program (HiO, LU, 2004), the group had to give a 30 minutes presentation of their results from the project work for their lecturers and fellow students. The students were encouraged to take various kinds of media into use, both as a part of their work processes and in their presentations. They were also obliged to deliver a project report consisting of a collective reflection note in which they had to give an account of their project’s content, aims and conclusions. In addition, they had to reflect on how they, as future teachers, could present the chosen topic to pre-school children, that is, they have to write a “didaktisk[4] reflection”, to use the Norwegian term. Finally, they had to hand in a charcoal drawing with sketches based on a chosen theme from the project work (ibid).
Except from a few examples I gave the students on what a video-trigger could be and in which context it could be used, theywere given no further instructions or expectations on how they should use the application. My purpose with such an open approach was that theusers of the application should feel free to take the application into use in a way they foundappropriate. This open approach must be seen in association with the first part of my research question which was: How do students take video-triggers integrated in a discussion-board into use? I was also inspired by a student on the course, with whom I discussed the application in advance. He said: Just show it to them, and they’ll know how to use it! The students’ use of Herme 1.1 during the project was in accordance with this statement, from day one of the project period they published triggers and contributed to the discussion-board without any difficulties.
As written above, Herme 1.1 wasused in theprojectUrban Aestheticswhere the students worked in groups with the inquiry: How can we reduce the amount of garbage in daily life, and in which way can we involve children in this process? Both students and the teacher recorded and published video-triggers on the current website, and the activity level at Herme was observed as high. The video-triggers consisted of a wide range of contents, from e.g. a discussion among the students about limitation of their project theme, to e.g. a scene from a refuse dump.
The students started to use Herme 1.1 to discuss how they could approach the inquiry and how they could fix the limit of their work. By using the discussion-board they considered different perspectives and possible angles from which they could start to limit their topic. E.g. exploring peoples reactions on a person throwing a bag of garbage at a public place, or exploring the connections between garbage and art. The following example illustrates the students’ discussion on the latter; which connections are there between garbage and art?
1.2.
3.
4.
Illustration2:
One student published a video clip consisting of a piece of art craft made of re-cycled material (1). Along with the video-clip he wrote a contribution to the discussion-board (2). A fellow student wrote a response to the first student’s contribution (3). Another student contributed to the discussion by bringing in a new perspective (4).
The illustration above isan example on how the group used the application to invite their fellow students to comment on a specific trigger. At a point, in the work process, the distinction between garbage and art was a central issue. In the illustration one of the students has published a trigger in the shape of a picture. The picture is attended with a comment saying that the object is made of recycled material. He asks if this can be regarded as art, and further, he asks if such recycling is reserved only for those with plenty of spare time and with creative abilities. His fellow students replies to the question whether this is art or garbage. One of them writes that it is a matter of context, whether it should be regarded as art or as garbage. Another student writes that it depends on the eye that sees, that some people would consider it as art, while others would not. In addition, he brings up another important issue, namely the educational dimension by asking how one can present this perspective to preschool children. Hereby he reminds his group members that they have to include this didactical perspective in their further work on this topic, or another topic they will agree on.
A similar process was observed regarding to other topics that were discussed among the students.As mentioned above, the students agreed on working with the inquiry:How can we reduce the amount of garbage in daily life, and in which way can we involve children in this process?Already day two of the project period the students agreed upon a topic and an inquiry for further exploration of this. I claim that a main reason for the students’ quick start of the project was the application Herme, which contributed both to keep the discussion going on and to structure it. This view is supplied by the students who declared in the interview, that the written discussions along with the triggers enhanced the communication between them, forced them to concentrate on the project and made them get started. Especially, they regarded the use of triggers in connection to the written contributions published on the discussion-board, as valuable in order to make them respond to each other in creative ways, compared to ordinary discussion-boards (without the possibility to play video-triggers).In the group interview a student stated it like this: