Kyparisia Papanikolaou and Evangelia Gouli Table 1: Curriculum of the technology enhanced learning course organised in F2F workshops and online assignments that correspond to various types of knowledge according to TPACK Topic Educational & multimedia resources on the Internet
Web 2.0 tools Pedagogical framework, Teaching /Didactic techniques Learning Design tools for Course Authoring
Tasks F2F workshop on educational & multimedia resources on the Internet Individual Assignments: Find and evaluate web resources for their discipline and share with peers through the class forum with comments on the usefulness of such resources in their educational practice. F2F workshops on the use of various categories of Web 2.0 tools Individual Assignments: Develop artefacts using specific tools such as prezi, glogster, pixton, video authoring, and comment on the usefulness of the specific tools for their subject F2F workshop on designing activities based on the Learning by Design framework using appropriate teaching/didactic techniques
Knowledge TK TCK
F2F workshop on LAMS as an authoring environment for technology enhanced learning courses Collaborative Assignment: Develop and author a course design for LAMS based on the LbyD framework working in groups
TK
TK TCK
PK
TPK/TPACK
3. Methodology The case study performed in the context of a technology enhanced learning course offered in the one‐year postgraduate certificate in education of the Higher School of Pedagogical and Technological Education (ASPETE) for graduates of a variety of disciplines. Two classes participated in the study, Class A including 40 trainees of various disciplines such as computer science, marketing/advertisement, graphical design, business administration in tourism, and Class B including 45 trainees of other disciplines such as sociology, law and political science, economic and financial sciences, forestry and natural environment. Moodle was used for administration purposes, content delivery, enabling also communication and collaboration beyond the F2F meetings/workshops. Through the course trainees worked individually and in groups (13 groups of Class A and 13 groups of Class B were formulated having 3 or 4 members). The trainees were organized in groups randomly or taking into account their individual characteristics such as personality traits (based on the five‐factor personality model) and other psychological variables such as self‐efficacy, anxiety and attitudes (5 groups of Class A and 5 groups of Class B were formed based on this ’protocol’). This group formulation approach resulted to interdisciplinary groups usually with mixed ability on using technology. At the end trainees completed a questionnaire evaluating the experience of collaboration as well as of the design framework proposed. In this study we aim at elaborating on the following research questions:
RQ1: How collaborative learning design is perceived by pre‐service teachers?
RQ2: How pre‐service teachers use technological and pedagogical tools when developing learning designs?
3.1 Data collection and analysis The data collected include the questionnaires that the trainees completed at the end of the semester as well as the group products developed. The trainees’ answers to each question of the questionnaire were analyzed and similar answers were grouped. Table 2 presents the trainees’ answers to five questions asking them to reflect on the collaborative work and the way they collaborated with their peers (Questions 1‐4). The last question aims at evaluating the pedagogical tools offered to support trainees in designing pedagogical sound courses and communicating their ideas to each other. As far as the group products are concerned, we analyzed the learning designs of indicative groups from each class (i.e. the groups that formulated on the basis of the personal characteristics of their members; 5 groups from Class A and 5 Groups from Class B), authored in LAMS along with their documentation. Particularly we explored how the particular groups integrated specific technological tools in learning activities, in which types of activities, with which didactic techniques, and which knowledge processes they aimed at cultivating.
372