Telefon: 23 83 79 92
Email: stgr@ucl.dk
Course designs in Meebook’s course builder
Udgivet: 2018
– analysis of 102 course designs.
In this article, the first systematic study of how teachers design courses in the newly implemented digital learning platforms in Denmark is presented. The study is based on the collection and double coding of the 102 most downloaded course designs in the learning platform Meebook.
Læs artiklen på Tidssskrift.dk
This article is published in the Danish journal, Læring & Medier (LOM), nr. 18, 2018.
The descriptive data is analysed in the light of Meebook’s affordances, previous research and didactical theory. Our analysis focusses on the three main intentions of the introduction of learning platforms for K9 schools.
This concerns firstly the use of learning objectives and their assessment, secondly the use of the platform in relation to the intention of sharing teacher-created course designs and thirdly the question of how teachers deal with the integration of multimodal learning materials in the course design. On one hand, the course builder in Meebook seems to affect teachers’ course designs strongly, and on the other hand, the course builder does not facilitate didactical reasoning and coherence. The results of the study have potential implications for platform designers, local school authorities and headmasters who deal with the implementation of platforms as well as teachers that daily use such course builders for teaching and the students’ learning.
Extract from the article:
Our study has shown that the digital design of the course builder in the learning platform Meebook strongly shapes the teachers’ planning practices in several regards. On the background of previous studies that identified an insufficient use of learning objectives and corresponding assessment, we observe an increased incorporation and creation of objectives, goals and assessment scales in our sample of course designs. The number of objectives, however, seems pragmatically and didactically questionable. The application of assessment scales appears highly restricted. The dominant use of skill objectives and skill assessment reveals a fundamental pattern.
