Email this article Le tecnologie digitali per la progettazione didattica
Abstract
Digital Technologies for Learning Design
The paper aims to analyze how educational technologies are changing the process of instructional design and the processes of personalization and inclusion. The contribution starts by examining the state of the art of instructional design today and how teachers perform their design tasks according to the approach based on «teachers’ thinking». The artefacts used in the design process and in the digital author software to support the design itself will be then explored. Starting from the existing scenario, future opportunities are assessed according to the needs created by the complexity of the current context and by the potentialities of today’s technologies. The hypothesis is the possibility of creating an artefact for design which can merge two moments that occur before class, the design and preparation of materials. The artefact is meant as a bridge crossing three moments of didactic activity, that is, designing, in-class interaction and documentation. The PROPIT project («Designing for personalization and inclusion with technologies»), which implies the use of such an artefact, will be briefly described.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Agostinho, S. (2006). The use of a visual learning design representation to document and communicate teaching ideas. Paper presented at the 23rd Annual Ascilite Conference.
Anastopoulou, S., Sharples, M., Ainsworth, S., & Crook, C. (2009). Personal inquiry: Linking the cultures of home and school with technology mediated science inquiry. In N. Pachler & J. Seipold (Eds.), Mobile learning cultures across education, work and leisure. Proceedings of the 3rd WLE Mobile Learning
Symposium. London: Work-Based Learning for Education Centre.
Baek, E., Cagiltay, K., Boling, E., & Frick, T. (2008). User-centered design and development. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, 14(1), 659-670.
Beadouin-Lafon, M., & Mackay, W. (2003). Prototyping tools and techniques. In J. Jacko & A. Sears (Eds.), The human-computer interaction handbook: Fundamentals. Evolving technologies and emerging applications (pp. 1006-1031). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Berthoz, A. (2011). Sempolessità. Torino: Codice.
Bichelmeyer, B., Boling, E., & Gibbons, A. (2006). Instructional design and technology models. Their impact on research, practice and teaching in IDT. In M. Orey, J. McLendon, & R. Branch, Educational media and technology yearbook. Westport: Libraries Unlimited.
Bichelmeyer, B., & Tripp, S. D. (1990). Rapid prototyping: An alternative. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38, 31.
Boyle, T. (2008). The design of learning objects for pedagogical impact. In L. Lockyer, S. Bennett, S. Agostinho, & B. Harper (Eds.), The handbook of research on learning design and learning objects: Issues, applications and technologies. Hershey: Information Science Reference.
Branch, R. M., & Kopcha, T. J. (2014). Instructional design models. In J. Spector, Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. New York: Springer.
Britain, S. (2004). A review of learning design: Concept, specification and tools. http://scholar.google.com/url?sa=U&q=www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/ACF1ABB.doc (consulted 10/08/2006).
Britain, S. (2007). Learning design systems: Current and future developments. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age (pp. 103-115). New York: Routledge.
Bromme, R. (1982). How to analyze routines in teachers’ thinking processes during lesson planning. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED223546.pdf.
Carr-Chellman, A. A. (2007). User Design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Carroll, J. M. (2000). Making use: Scenario-based design of human-computer interactions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Carroll, J. M., Chin, G., Rosson, M. B., & Neale, D. C. (2000). The development of cooperation: Five years of participatory design in the virtual school. In Processes, practices, methods, and techninques (pp. 239-251). Proceedings of the Conference on designing interactive systems. London: ACM.
Cennano, K., & Kalk, D. (2005). Real world instructional design. Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.
Charlier, E. (1989). Planifier un cours, c’est prendre des décisions. Bruxelles: De Boeck.
Ciccarelli, N. (2002). Progettare nell’era digitale. Venezia: Marsilio.
Clark, C. M., & Elmore, J. L. (1981). Transforming curriculum in mathematics, science, and writing: A case study of teacher yearly planning. Research Series, 99.
Clark, C. M., & Yinger, R. J. (1979). Three studies of teacher planning. Research Series, 55.
Charlton, P., & Magoulas, G. D. (2010). Autonomic computing and ontologies to enable context-aware learning design. Paper presented at 22nd International Conference on tools with artificial intelligence, Arras.
Conole, G., & Fill, K. (2005). A learning design toolkit to create pedagogically effective learning activities. Journal of Interactive Media in Education. http://jime.open.ac.uk/2005/08.
Creemers, B. P., & Westerhof, K. (1982). Routinization of instructive and management behavior of teachers. Haren: Educational Research Institute in the North.
Derntl, M., Neumann, S., & Oberhuemer, P. (2009). Report on the standardized description of instructional models. ECP 2007 EDU 417007.
Desgagné, S., & Larouche, H. (2010). Quand la collaboration de recherche sert la légitimation d’un savoir d’expérience. Recherche en Éducation - Hors Série, 1, 7-18.
Donald, C., Blake, A., Girault, I., Datt, A., & Ramsey, E. (2009). Approaches to learning design: Past the head and the hands to the HEART of the matter. Distance Education, 30(2), 179-199.
Gero, J., & Kannengiesser, U. (2002). The situated function-behaviour-structure framework. In J. Gero (Ed.), Artificial intelligence in Design ’02 (pp. 89-104). Dordrecht: Kluver Academic Publishers.
Giaconi, C., & Rossi, P. G. (2014). Progetto PROPIT: progettare per la personalizzazione e l’inclusione con il supporto delle tecnologie. SIM, 2, 42-44.
Gordon, J., & Zemke, R. (2000). The attack on ISD. Training, 37(4), 42-53.
Gustafson, K. L., & Branch, R. M. (1997). Revisioning models of instructional development. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(3), 73-89.
Jonassen, D. (1990). Thinking technology: Chaos in instructional design. Educational Technology, 30(2), 32-34.
Krug, S. (2005). Don’t make me think: A common sense approach to web usability. Indianapolis: Pearson Education.
Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science. London: Routledge.
Laurillard, D., & Masterman, E. (2009). TPD as online collaborative learning for innovation in teaching. In O. Lindberg & A. D. Olofsson (Eds.), On line learning communities and teaching professional development: Methods for improved educational delivery. Berlin: Springer, 230-246.
Manzini, E. (1990). Artefatti. Verso una nuova ecologia dell’ambiente artificiale, Milano: Domus Academy.
Marton, F., & Pang, M. F. (2006). On some necessary conditions of learning. Journal of the Learning Science, 193-220.
Marton, F., & Tsui, A. B. M. (2004). Classroom discourse and the space of learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
McAndrew, P., & Goodyear, P. (2007). Representing practitioner experiences through learning design and patterns. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing and delivering e-learning (pp. 92-102). London: Routledge.
Mor, Y., & Winters, N. (2007). Design approaches in technology-enhanced learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 15(1), 61-75.
Morine-Dershimer, G. (1979). Teacher plan and classroom reality. East Lansing: Michigan State University.
Morine-Dershimer, G., & Vallence, E. (1976). Teacher planning. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory.
Rivoltella, P. C., & Rossi, P. G. (2012). L’agire didattico. Brescia: La Scuola.
Rizzo, A. (2000). La natura degli artefatti e la loro progettazione. Sistemi Intelligenti, 12(3), 437-52.
Rizzolati, C., & Sinigaglia, G. (2006). So quel che fai. Il cervello che agisce e i neuroni specchio. Milano: Raffaello Cortina.
Rossi, P. G. (2009). Didattica enattiva. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
Rossi, P. G. (2014). Tra macro e micro progettazione: che significa progettare per attività? SIM, 2, 48-50.
Rossi, P. G., & Toppano, E. (2009). Progettare nella società della consocenza. Roma: Carocci.
San Diego, J. P., Laurillard, D., Boyle, T., Bradley, C., Ljubojevic, D., Neumann, T., & Pearce, D. (2008). Towards a user-oriented analytical approach to learning design. ALT-J, 16(1), 15-29.
Sardo Brown, D. (1988). Twelve middle school teachers’ planning. Elementary School Journal, 89, 69-87.
Sardo Brown, D. (1990). Experienced teachers planning practice: A US survey. Journal of Education for Teaching, 16(1), 57-71.
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard educational Review, 1, 1-21.
Smith, E. L., & Sendelbach, N. B. (1979). Teacher intention for science instructionand their antecedents in programs materials. San Francisco: AERA.
Schwartz, D., Brophy, S., Lin, X., & Bransford, J. (1999). Software for managing complex learning: Examples from an educational psychology course. Educational Technology. Research and Development, 47(2), 39-59.
Tillema, H. (2003). Categories in teacher planning. In M. Kompf & P. M. Denicolo, Teacher thinking twenty years on: Revisiting persisting problems and advances in education (pp. 61-69). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Tochon, F. (1993). L’enseignant(e) expert(e). Paris: Nathan.
Wanlin, P. (2013). La pensée des enseignants lors de la planification de leur enseignement. Revue Française de Pédagogie. http://rfp.revues.org/1294.
Wanlin, P., & Bodeux, C. (2006). Les processus de pensée des enseignants durant la planification et l’implémentation de leur enseignement. Actes du Colloque International de l’Association pour le Développement des Méthodologies d’Évaluation en Éducation. Luxembourg.
Willis, J., & Wright, K. E. (2000). A general set of procedures for constructivist instructional design: the new R2D2 model. Educational Technology, 40(2), 5-20.
Yildirim, A. (2003). Instructional planning in a centralized school system: Lessons of a study among primary school teachers. International Review of Education, 49(5), 525-543.
Yinger, R. J. (1980). A study of teacher planning. The Elementary School Journal, 80, 107-127.
Yinger, R. J., & Clark, C. M. (1982). Understanding teachers’ judgments about instruction: The task, the method, and the meaning. Research Series, 121.
You, Y. (1993). What can we learn from chaos theory? An alternative approach to instructional systems design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(3), 17-32.
Zemke, R. A. (2002). A hard look at ISD. Training Magazine, 39(2), 26-35.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7358/ecps-2014-010-ross
Copyright (©) 2014 Journal of Educational, Cultural and Psychological Studies (ECPS Journal) – Editorial format and Graphical layout: copyright (©) LED Edizioni Universitarie
Journal of Educational, Cultural and Psychological Studies (ECPS)
Registered by Tribunale di Milano (19/05/2010 n. 278)
Online ISSN 2037-7924 - Print ISSN 2037-7932
Research Laboratory on Didactics and Evaluation - Department of Education - "Roma Tre" University
Executive Editor: Gaetano Domenici - Associate Executive Editor & Managing Editor: Valeria Biasci
Editorial Board: Eleftheria Argyropoulou - Massimo Baldacci - Joao Barroso - Richard Bates - Christofer Bezzina - Paolo Bonaiuto - Lucia Boncori - Pietro Boscolo - Sara Bubb - Carlo Felice Casula - Jean-Émile Charlier - Lucia Chiappetta Cajola - Carmela Covato - Jean-Louis Derouet - Peter Early - Franco Frabboni - Constance Katz - James Levin - Pietro Lucisano - Roberto Maragliano - Romuald Normand - Michael Osborne - Donatella Palomba - Michele Pellerey - Clotilde Pontecorvo - Vitaly V. Rubtzov - Jaap Scheerens - Noah W. Sobe - Francesco Susi - Giuseppe Spadafora - Pat Thomson
Editorial Staff: Fabio Alivernini - Guido Benvenuto - Anna Maria Ciraci - Massimiliano Fiorucci - Luca Mallia - Massimo Margottini - Giovanni Moretti - Carla Roverselli
Editorial Secretary:Nazarena Patrizi
© 2001 LED Edizioni Universitarie di Lettere Economia Diritto