This paper will discuss the process of the MA program ePedagogy / Visual Knowledge Building during the first semester of the academic year 2005 – 2006. This MA program is a joint venture between the Universities of Helsinki, Hamburg and INHOLLAND. This publication will discuss and evaluate the concrete steps (in terms of learning process) during this first semester. In particular the role of the eTutor will get special attention. This publication is based on the principle of action research. Hart & Bond defines action research as “it is a form of reflective inquiry which enables practitioners to better realise such qualities in their practice. The tests for good action research are very pragmatic ones. Does it improve the professional quality of the transactions between practitioners and clients/colleagues? This action research approach is being realised upon three main sources. As an eTutor and member of the staff of this program I weekly filled in an “Evaluation Log” in which the following questions are centralized: 1. What happened (this week) 2. Significant experience 3. Reflection 4. Actions Secondly I used a little survey which was being used by the staff to evaluate the first semester. All the three Universities filled in a form with the following questions concerning the education and organisation: Education 1. What do you consider most hindering in your teaching? 2. What do you consider most beneficial in your teaching? 3. What kind of teaching methods do you prefer in this program? 4. Do you think the course offers are attractive for the target group? 5. How do you evaluate student’s engagements and motivation in your courses? 6. What can / should be improved in terms of collaborative learning activities and processes? Organisation 1. In what specific context do you spot organisational constraints? 2. Does your organisation recognise and support the MA program? 3. What is your short-, mid- and long term vision on this program? Thirdly an important source for this action research approach was the International Seminar which was hold in the middle of February 2006. In this seminar the changes based on the questions of the questionnaire were discussed and implemented. The theoretical framework in this publication is based on the dissertation of Karel Kreijns (Sociable CSCL Environments). In this dissertation he discussed the collaborative cognitiveand epistemic performance in a CSCLE. The social presence theory takes a central position in this dissertation. In this paper the pitfalls and barriers concerning a sociable CSCLE are being discussed and evaluated. This paper describes, the interventions the staff took, in order to improve the educational context of the program. From this perspective we looked very carefully to the barriers and pitfalls in our Virtual Learning Environment (VLE). We found evidence for the fact that a good CSCLE consists at least a good balance between Content, Community and Pedagogy. In the program we emphasised our focus (too much) on content and (too) little on community and pedagogy. The community was poor because of the fact that we used three content learning systems, which didn’t stimulate the group processes. Pedagogy was too much based on individual eTutor behaviour. In January 2006, after the courses were ended, the Universities organised a little survey. In this survey was shown that we have to some interventions to improve the learning process. At the International Seminar in February 2006 eTutors and students discussed the problems. The following interventions are being considered and implemented: 1. The use of three Virtual Learning Environments should be decreased. Especially the INHOLLAND / Blackboard system doesn’t reflect the open source philosophy. Besides this the accessibility of this system is not very easy for foreign students 2. The collaborative aspect should be increased, by emphasising the interdisciplinaryand international co-operation. The formation of international subgroups is implemented.
Designers are increasingly collaborating with various stakeholders to address complex societal challenges. These challenges often require a codesign approach, where differ-ent actors with diverse perspectives and experiences unite to explore innovative ave-nues for change. Such collaboration requires empathy between the actors to under-stand each other’s perspective better in their interactions. This paper aims to assist so-cial designers in orchestrating such empathic codesign processes by introducing an Em-pathic Journey framework. This conceptual and practical framework is based on em-pathic design theory and three design cases which used Virtual Reality for perspective exchange between actors. The framework addresses the importance of integrating an emotional spark through immersion and the necessity of embedding immersive experiences in a larger journey.
MULTIFILE
Seven college lecturers and two senior support staff were interviewed during 2021 about their experiences teaching in hybrid virtual classrooms (HVC). These technology-rich learning environments allow teachers to simultaneously teach students who are in class (on campus) and students who are joining remotely (online). There were two reasons for this choice: first, ongoing experimentation from innovative teaching staff who were already using this format before the COVID-19 pandemic; secondly, as a possible solution to restrictions on classroom size imposed by the pandemic. Challenges lecturers faced include adjusting teaching practice and lesson delivery to serve students in the class and those online equally; engaging and linking the different student groups in structured and natural interactions; overcoming technical challenges regarding audio and visual equipment; suitably configuring teaching spaces and having sufficient pedagogical and technical support to manage this complex process. A set of practical suggestions is provided. Lecturers should make reasoned choices when teaching in this format since it requires continued experimentation and practice to enhance the teaching and learning opportunities. When external factors such as classroom size restrictions are the driving force, the specific type of synchronous learning activities should be carefully considered. The structure and approach to lessons needs to be rethought to optimise the affordances of the hybrid virtual and connected classroom. The complexity of using these formats, and the additional time needed to do it properly, should not be underestimated. These findings are consistent with previous literature on this subject. An ongoing dialogue with faculty, support staff and especially students should be an integral part of any further implementation in this format.
