Zoekresultaten

What students learn from IPD projects

An on-going investigation in the learning effects of IPD projects. In three subsequent semesters the students were asked how they rated their competencies at the start of the project as well as at the end of it. Also questionnaires were filled out and students were interviewed. A lot of students tended to give themselves lower ratings in the end than in the begin. It appeared that if they met any difficulties in for instance communication or co-operation during the project, that they interpreted this as a decrease in competencies. Finally the students were explicitly asked to mention an eventual increase in competencies and also a possible contribution for this effect. Only a few factors that actually contribute to the learning effects have been defined.

Learning in networks Community of Practice: a new approach to entrepreneurial learning

Educational programs teaching entrepreneurial behaviour and knowledge are crucial to a vital and healthy economy. The concept of building a Communities of Practice (CoP) could be very promising. CoP’s are formed by people who engage in a process of collective learning in a shared domain of human endeavour (Wenger, McDermott and Snyder, 2002). They consist of a group of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly. Normally CoP’s are rather homogeneous. Saxion institute Small Business & Retail Management (SB&RM) started a CoP with entrepreneurs September 2007. Typical in the this community, are the differences between the partners. The Community consists of students, entrepreneurs and members of an institution for higher education. They have different characteristics and they don’t share the same knowledge. Thus, building long-lasting relations can be complicated. Solid relations for longer periods are nevertheless inevitable in using CoP as a mean in an educational concept that takes approximately 4 years. After one year an evaluation took place on the main aspects of a lasting partnership. The central problem SB&RM in Deventer faces is to design the CoP in a way possible members will join and stay for a longer period and in a way it ensures entrepreneurial learning. This means important design characteristics have to be identified, and the CoP in Deventer has to be evaluated to assess whether it meets those design characteristics in an effective and efficient way. The main target of the evaluation is to determine which key factors are important to make sure continuity in partnership is assured and entrepreneurial learning is best supported. To solve the problem, an investigation on how a CoP works, what group dynamics take place, and how this can be measured has to be conducted. Furthermoreusing the CoP as a tool for entrepreneurship means key aspects of entrepreneurial learning have to be identified. After that the CoP in Deventer has to be examined on both aspects. According to literature CoP’s define themselves along three dimensions: domain (indicating what is it about), community (defining how it functions), and practice (indicating what capabilities it has produced) (Wenger, 1998). This leads to meaningful, shared and coordinated activities (Akkerman et al, 2007): Key aspects of a successful CoP lie in both hard and soft sides of creating a partnership. It means on one hand a CoP has to deal with defining their own overall vision, formulating long term goals and targets on the short term. They have to formulate how to achieve those targets and create meaningful activities (reification). On the other hand a CoP has to deal with relations, trust, norms and values (participation). Reification and participation as design characteristic can provide indicators on which the CoP in Deventer can be evaluated. A lasting partnership means joining the CoP and staying. Weick provides us with a suitable model that enables us to do research and evaluate whether the CoP in Deventer is successful or not, Weick’s model of means convergence. To effectively ensure entrepreneurial learning the process in the CoP has to provide or enable actionoriented forms through Project-based activity, accompanied by reflection, with high emotional exposure (or cognitive affection) preferably caused by discontinuities to be suitable as a tool in entrepreneurial learning. Furthermore it should be accompanied by the right preconditions to work effectively and efficiently. The evaluation of the present CoP in Deventer is done by interviewing all participants at the end of the first year of the partnership. In a structured interview, based on literature studies, all participants were separately questioned

A First Step Towards Learning Analytics

From the article: "The educational domain is momentarily witnessing the emergence of learning analytics – a form of data analytics within educational institutes. Implementation of learning analytics tools, however, is not a trivial process. This research-in-progress focuses on the experimental implementation of a learning analytics tool in the virtual learning environment and educational processes of a case organization – a major Dutch university of applied sciences. The experiment is performed in two phases: the first phase led to insights in the dynamics associated with implementing such tool in a practical setting. The second – yet to be conducted – phase will provide insights in the use of pedagogical interventions based on learning analytics. In the first phase, several technical issues emerged, as well as the need to include more data (sources) in order to get a more complete picture of actual learning behavior. Moreover, self-selection bias is identified as a potential threat to future learning analytics endeavors when data collection and analysis requires learners to opt in."

When and how do peers stimulate engaging in desirable difficulties

Supplemental instruction, also known as Peer Assisted Study Sessions (SI-PASS), is a well-established form of peer learning that has been implemented in higher education institutions across the globe and that coincides with learning gains for participants. While the effects on learning gains have been extensively studied with quasi-experiments, the underlying mechanisms that make SI-PASS effective are less well understood. This study explored what benefits students thought SI-PASS offered and through which mechanisms. We studied this by interviewing 14 students who participated in SI-PASS during a field experiment that reliably found a significant impact of SI-PASS on performance. The students were asked to expand on if and why they thought SI-PASS was effective. Thematic analysis and independent coding indicated an interplay of three main drivers. SI-PASS was experienced as effective because it stimulated the use of effective study techniques and social learning. These drivers were facilitated and enhanced by a pedagogical climate that lowered the threshold to engage in collaborative learning and effective study techniques. These findings could help pinpoint what elements should be highlighted during the preparation of SI-leaders and what aspects should be monitored and tested when implementing or studying SI-PASS.

Cluttering identified: differential diagnostics between cluttering, stuttering and speech impairment related to learning difficulties

Dutch position statement children with listening difficulties

Inter)nationally there is discussion about whether auditory processing disorders (APD) should be seen as a unique clinical diagnosis and what is the most appropriate diagnosis and referral of children in this target group. In this context, the Dutch Audiological Centres (AC) have different care pathways for children with so-called unexplained listening difficulties. The purpose of the current document is to provide professionals with tools to identify, diagnose and treat children with listening difficulties. The Dutch Position Statement Children with Listening Difficulties has been developed based on current scientific evidence of listening difficulties, and based on meetings held with professionals. Professionals in the Dutch Audiological Centres have reached a consensus with the following 9 statements: Definition: (1) The target group 'Children with listening difficulties' is not a unique and demonstrable clinical entity. (2) The problems of children with listening difficulties are multimodal. (3) The symptoms of children with listening difficulties may also occur in children with other developmental disorders such as AD(H)D, DLD, dyslexia and learning disorders. Detection and referral: (4) After detection of listening difficulties, children can be referred to a multidisciplinary centre. Diagnostics: (5) When diagnosing a child with listening difficulties, an audiologist, a speech language therapist and a behavioral scientist must be involved. (6) Listening difficulties are initially mapped using patient history (with client-centred focus) and, if available, a validated questionnaire. (7) In the case of children with listening difficulties, a speech-in-noise test is always carried out in addition to the pure tone and speech audiometry (8) The diagnostic procedure for listening difficulties starts from a broad perspective on development. Therapy: (9) For children with listening difficulties, intervention is focused on the client’s needs and focuses on action-oriented practice. This document informs professionals in the Netherlands, who are working with children who are referred because of listening difficulties in the absence of hearing loss, about the current evidence available and about the consensus in the Netherlands.