A technology-enhanced learning environment to support learning by sharing professional experience in writing

In Switzerland, over 75% of higher secondary educat ion is vocational. Most of it is organized as a “du al system”, in which apprentices spend 60 to 70% of th eir weekly training time as an employee in a compan y d the remaining time at school. Unfortunately, apprentice s annot always connect theory to practice, i.e. tr aining and learning in school and the workplace is little arti culated. Financed by the Federal Office for Profess ional Education and Technology, the Dual-T project aims at developing technology-enhanced learning de signs that will help to narrow the gap between these different learning pla ces. Our fundamental working hypothesis is that sha red writing activities about professional experience can improv e the apprentice’s domain knowledge and skills, hel p them integrate the content studied in school with the ac tual practice at the workplace and contribute to pr fessional identity building (Wenger, 1998). In this paper, we focus both on the feasibility of computer supported collaborative writing and the appropriateness of the specific computer environmen t we implemented. In order to propose pertinent des igns, we first investigated the characteristics of the popul ation with interviews and with surveys. We then led four studies on computer supported collaborative writing activities mplemented with two different tools of the platfo rm: the weblog engine and the wiki. The results provide useful information at two level s: the ergonomics of the computer environment we us ed and the feasibility of the different learning desig ns. The adopted and adjusted platform (ELGG) proved to be appropriate in supporting collaborative writing to learn activities. The two collaborative and peer tu toring designs we implemented successfully fostered knowledge shar ing and building within the population and furnishe d us valuable information for future design of this type of activities. Theoretical framework Our investigation draws from the idea that writing enhances knowledge constitution (Galbraith 1999). E arly writing to learn literature was claiming that using ew technologies at all levels of the educational system would lead to more drafting and revising, longer texts an d texts of better quality. The collaborative writin g literature (Crook, 1994; Littleton & Light 1999; Spek, Johnson , Dice & Heaton, 1999) suggests that collaborative writing can be: more efficient (because different aspects of th e task can be shared out), of better quality (becau se different individuals can contribute with different ideas and with different expertise), better thought out (bec ause each individual has to take into account the others’ poi nt of view). However, the literature diverges regar ding the efficiency of collaborative writing: texts can be w ritten in less time (because the less able contribu tors are helped by the more able ones), or written in more time (becau se the less able contributors hold back the more ab le ones). In our research, we focus on “restructuring learning envir onments” (Flower & Hayes, 1984; Erkens et al. 2003) where the main hypothesis is that knowledge transformation le ads to knowledge constitution (Galbraith, 1999). While mainstream “writing to learn” research focuse s on the production of larger texts or self contain ed entries, writing in a CSCL perspective rather conce r s producing short texts in various genres (questi on , arguments, definitions, etc.). One CSCL approach on writing is peer tutoring. Peer tutoring is a process develope d by Fantuzzo and his colleagues (Wolfe, Fantuzzo and Wolfe, 1986 ). It allows each student to play the role of tutor and tutored. Reciprocal peer tutoring allows each student to ben efit from giving directions, evaluating and providi ng reinforcement for their partner. It creates mutual assistance and social support among participants (F antuzzo, Riggio, Connelly and Dimeff, 1989; Pigott, Fantuzzo and Cle ment, 1986). Most of the time, research on peer tut oring provided evidence for its positive effects on perfo rmance, learning, reduction of stress and anxiety a nd an increase in satisfaction with the progress ( Riggio, Fantuzzo, C nnelly and Dimeff, 1991). Still, little research has investigated the effects of peer tutoring for "writing to learn" activities (Gielen, Dochy, Tops, Peeters, 2007). I n this research we focus on peer tutoring and collaborative activities fostering writing to learn activities. When writing contributes to a larger collective bod y of knowledge whose elements can be edited, manipulated and put in relation, we refer to so-cal led computer-supported intentional learning environ me ts (CSILE/Knowledge Forum) (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 19 94). Scenarios associated with that kind of learnin g environment aim at articulation and reflection. In other words, they reframe the classroom discou rse to support reflective knowledge building in ways extensible to out-of-school knowledge. In this research we plan to investigate various col lab rative writing to learn activity designs based on peer tutoring and collaborative knowledge building appro aches. From a methodological point of view we adopt a desi gn-based research approach (Collins, 1992) that according to the Design-Based Research Collective (2003) can be defined as follows: Design of learni ng environments and refinement of learning theories ar intertwined. There are continuous cycles of desig n, enactment, analysis, and redesign. Research should lead to sha rable theories and guidelines for practitioners. Re search must account for how designs function in authentic setti ngs. We structure and describe our design experimen ts with conjecture maps. According to Sandoval (2004a:abstr ct), “designed learning environments embody conjec tur s about learning and instruction, and the empirical s tudy of learning environments allows such conjectur es to be refined over time. The construct of embodied conjec ture is introduced as a way to demonstrate the theo retical nature of learning environment design, and to frame method ological issues in studying such conjectures.” Our conjecture maps are structured on four columns: Theory, (theor etical foundations), Embodiment (design elements), Process (cognitive and social processes induced by the “emb odiment”), Outcomes (observed measurable results of the processes). Preliminary investigations regarding apprentices’ a ttitude toward writing and technologies In order to better know the population and to propo se relevant learning activities and an appropriate technical environment, we defined 2 preliminary ste p . First, we investigated apprentices’ attitude to wards writing and writing with a computer. We administrated two questionnaires : the “Writing Apprehension Scale” (Daly & Miler, 1975) and the “Writing with a Computer Scale ” (Shaver, 1990). Second, we investigated apprentic s’ training background and experience, their attitude towards t he training at school and apprenticeship in the wor kplace, and their use and attitude towards ICT (personal, profe ssional and learning uses). We conducted s mi-structured interviews with a sample of second year apprentices. Based on these interviews, we then constructed a survey questionnaire and administrated it to the whole second year popu lation. The results from the Writing Apprehension Scale sho wed that most students do not apprehend writing activities (average of 16 on a scale up to 25). Sev en students showed a low level of apprehension and only two a high level of apprehension. A factor analysis revea led two main dimensions: the apprehension towards t he writing act (with an explained variance of 32.66%) and the apprehension towards the evaluation (with an explai ned variance of 12.80%). The distribution of the questions betwe en the two factors is almost identical with the one proposed by Bline, Lowe, Meixner, Nouri and Pearce in 2001. Fur the analysis showed that apprentices apprehend mor e the writing act per se than the evaluation of their written productions ( F(1,24)=11.65 ; MSE=105.58 ; p<0.01). Even though it seams that the writing apprehension level do s not affect the writing productions’ quality ( Madigan, Linton and Johnson, 1996), we needed to investigate this d imension in order to evaluate the attitude of the a pprentices towards the writing activities we intended to imple ment and to evaluate the feasibility of the design. The results from the apprehension scale towards writing with a computer showed mostly positive attitudes. We also found that the students appreciate the enjoyability of compute r writing more than its usefulness (that they don’t really perceive) (F(1,24)= 12.46 ; MSE=3.85, p<0.01). These results suggest that computer supported writing activities are feasible with dental care apprentices. Results from the semi-structured interviews with 10 apprentices and the follow-up questionnaire (train ing background, experience, attitudes towards the appre nticeship at school and in the workplace, use and a ttitude towards ICT) administered to all second year studen ts showed a rather heterogeneous population. Here, we only present three salient descriptive results. Firstly, neither prior training (e.g. some started another apprenticeship before) nor career plans are the same. Second, work tasks and tutoring support varies widely across de ntal practices. Accordingly, our population has very different skil l levels. Third, most apprentices do have access to a c mputer at home, but only about half at work, even though ther e is always at least one computer at the workplace. Results of those preliminary investigations suggest that: • computer supported writing activities about one’s w ork experience are feasible with dental care apprentices, although not necessarily in the workpl ace; • the large heterogeneity we discovered in the studen ts’ profiles could be a very good basis for collaborative knowledge building writing activities ; • the large differences observed