3.7 3.8 Frameworks podcast and reflection

The following five frameworks and descriptions have been extracted from this activity’s podcast:

  1. ‘Achievement Frameworks’, which are really about measuring individual’s progress in terms of their learning using ICT.
  2. ‘Cognitive Frameworks’, which are looking about the impact on an individual in terms of how they think and the interaction. So that’s very much focused on the micro; the relationship between an individual in a learning context and what’s happening in their head in a sense.
  3. ‘Software Frameworks’, which deal with the type of software that’s being used. And so they might categorise those in terms of ‘drill and skill’, ‘adventure programme’, ‘open-ended software’; they might do them in terms of ‘tutor-tool-tutee’, where the role of the software is being identified. The problem with those sorts of frameworks is that they’re kind of technologically determined. They assume that the software determines what happens and, of course, it’s what you do with the software, at the end of the day, that determines what happens
  4. ‘Pedagogical Frameworks’, so Squires and McDougall’s Perspectives Interactions Paradigm, it gives us a sort of classic example of that. Where they’re looking explicitly at the nature of the interaction around computer use. Not just at the machine, but all the other activity that’s related to the activity of the machine and they’re looking at the relationship between the teacher, the student and the computer, in that context.
  5. ‘Evolutionary Frameworks’, which are kind of looking at the progression and change in how ICT has been rolled out, either in an education system or in a particular classroom, so in a particular teacher’s practice.

Such frameworks may be seen as different ways of how studies may be contextualised. Benefits of frameworks are that they do offer some perspective, some view, to give some clarity.

For activity 1.4 (see: https://kijt.wordpress.com/2011/02/10/basic-questions-whilst-reading-a-paper/) a number of questions were set out through which papers could be better understood and compared. The frameworks outlined in this podcast and the perspectives outlined by Oliver et al. (2007) in reading 4, may be good additions to these questions when reading papers related to TEL (Technology Enabled Learning). Tentitavly, I would add the following questions;

  • What paradigm does the study align to?
  • To which framework (from activity 3.7) may this study be associated?
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s