3.7 Moodle curriculum Signals
3.7.2 Ensuring justice in the use of Moodle
3.7.2.2 Objectives of using Moodle
133
the use of Moodle, which were giving shape and direction of using Moodle in their teaching of physics, they became more interested and they were able to use Moodle according to their aims.
This then indicates that lecturers become more motivated after they have undergone the process of produced reflection in order to form aims which addresses their personal needs, and this suggests that aims are a nucleus, starting point, or the basic guiding principle of using any LMPs before learning outcomes and objective are declared, refer to Figure 3.6 (Govender & Khoza, 2017;
Maxwell, 2013). That is why Mpungose (2017) advocates that learners can never achieve the intended outcomes if the aim is not clearly specified. In other words, lecturers have a duty to understand the aims of using Moodle and state them clearly so that students may achieve their goals as well. Thus, if there are no aims, there will be no proper teaching and learning to ensure justice in using Moodle (Govender & Khoza, 2017; Schiro, 2013). As a result, objectives are some of the goals which are specific, and that must be considered on the use of Moodle when teaching the Physical Science module.
134
problems based on laws of motion’. In other words, objectives are narrower and specific to the focal point of what lecturers wants to attain or cover in the use of any resource in teaching and learning the module, and this can be achieved when lecturers are able go through the process of formal reflection which may give an understanding of the module need (formal curriculum) (Singh'
& Kaurt, 2016; Vithal, 2016).
In addition of the above, in the context of this, study Martín-Blas and Serrano-Fernández (2009), and Jackson (2017), assert that objectives (specific statement of intention) are formed in order to address the module need (formed on the basis of the content/subject/module), and this requires lecturers’ formal reflection on the content of the module. These studies aver that the objective of using Moodle in teaching a Physical Science Module might be: ‘to develop students’ ability to solve problems on laws of motion’ or to state the laws of motion’. These examples indicate that objectives unlike aims, are specific statements in order to address the specific content of a module such as Mechanics in this case (Govender & Khoza, 2017; Kennedy et al., 2006).
Moreover, the significance of objectives is further asserted in the study conducted by Ramona (2017) at a South African university, and the main objective of the study was to explore students reflection on the use of electronic resources when conducting their research. Convenient and purposive samplings were used to select Masters’ student as participants in this study. The study revealed that students were using the word objectives and purpose synonymously and interchangeably, and that objectives enhance the general feeling of what they may use for conducting their research and how they may benefit (the side of a researcher). The study concluded that students’ understanding of objectives assisted them of required steps of how to go about doing research methodology and other nitty-gritties of doing research using electronic resources like search engines, Moodle, and others. The assertion from the study suggests that objective are as a result of formal reflection which may assist lecturer to have a formal step-by-step on how to use electronic resources like Moodle in the teaching of a module (Boud et al., 2013; Todorova, 2016).
In the context of this study, this then indicates that objectives may provide a clear direction and guide lecturers on how to use Moodle in teaching the module content.
135
Moreover, studies reveal that objectives play a major role in the planning process of any teaching and learning programme which indicates that the use of any resources for a thorough, well-planned module depends on clear, and well-formulated objectives (Entwistle & Ramsden, 2015; Kennedy et al., 2006; Khoza & Manik, 2015; Moon, 2013). These studies further aver that objectives always create a space where lecturers will formally reflect on the module content in order to formulate the clear and specific statement about what students are intending to learn. According Reddy and le Grange (2017), as well as Vithal (2016), the clear and concise formulation of objectives can avoid the state of confusion and misunderstanding between lecturers and students in terms of the module because, students will be made aware of what is intended to be learned, and this can lead to good and higher levels of communication which will address the module need through lecturers’ formal reflection. For instance, when the LMPs like Moodle is adopted by the university, and the lecturers does not have a clear objectives on its usage in teaching and learning the module, this might course the reluctance to both lecturers and student to use Moodle (Maxwell, 2013; Mpungose-, 2016a).
This then suggests the need for formal reflection of lecturers which may act as a drive in developing their objectives of using Moodle before the teaching and learning process in a particular module may begin (Govender & Khoza, 2017; Mohammadyari & Singh, 2015).
According to the studies, the formulation of objectives must involve three characteristics, namely:
performance (what is observable and can be done), condition (situation under which task can be done), and criteria (how well the task is done) (Boud, Cohen, & Sampson, 2014; Cohen, 1966;
Falchikov, 2001; Kayes & McPherson, 2010; Khoza-, 2013c). For instance, the objective of using Moodle including this three characteristic might be, ‘I will assist student to differentiate between Chat activity and discussion forum (performance) by sharing 10 percent of their social experiences (criteria) in using both Moodle activities (condition)’. Moreover, the formulation of objectives requires formal reflection on the content of the programme or module so that the correct keywords can be used which includes the following: determine, assist, appreciate, grasp, become clear with, and others (Kennedy et al., 2006; Peabody & Noyes, 2017). As a result, objectives must be precise, measurable and with clear performances that the student may perform in order to reach the stipulated goals (aims) (Fink, 2013; Meierdirk, 2016). Thus, Khoza- (2013c) and Langer (2000),
136
aver that formation of objectives must address authentic and formal activities through the process of formal reflection, and thus the objectives must be specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time bound (S.M.A.R.T). This then suggests that formulation of objective must be in line with formal reflection of the lecturer on the use of Moodle in teaching a module, and it must address the module need. That is the reason why Hunkins and Ornstein (1998), and Hoadley and Jansen (2013), as well as Harris, Spiller, Schoenberge-Orgad, and Cockburn-Wootten (2012), share the same sentiment that the formulation objectives should have the correct wording, be trustworthy, appropriate, and match the context in order to ensure justice by achieving goals.
Furthermore, Kennedy et al. (2006, p. 5) outlines the difference between aims and objectives is that “the aims of a module gives the broad purpose and general teaching intention of the module, whilst the objective gives more specific information about what the teaching of the module hopes to achieve”. This assertion indicates that objectives may be taken as specific sub aims of a particular program or a module. That is why Ramona (2017) indicates that objectives (short-term goal) emerge from aims (long-term goal), and they are an explicit account of what a lecturer can do to use Moodle positively. For instance, in the context of this study the aim (general) of using Moodle may be, ‘To prepare student for using an online learning platform’; from this aim, the objective (specific) may emerge as ‘ability to understand and use Moodle activities like Chat room, Journal writing and others.’ This suggests that there is a need for lecturers to undergo formal reflection in order draw objectives from aims; that is, they need to understand facts from research about the use of Moodle before they formulate relevant objectives (Le Grange* & Reddy, 2017;
Waghid- & Davids, 2016). However, see the qualitative study conducted by Khoza (2015) on student-teachers’ reflection on the teaching of their subjects. It was concluded from the study that student-teachers were only familiar with aims and objectives but they were not well versed with learning outcomes. This suggests that most lecturers turn a blind eye on learning outcomes which are informed by informal reflection in order to ensure that students’ needs are catered for (Meierdirk, 2016; Myers, 2016).
137 3.7.2.3 Learning outcomes
It is worth noting that globally, in order to ensure justice in all activities such as module activities in the use of LMPs in HEIs should be driven by outcome-based approach which is driven by learning outcomes (Gosling & Moon, 2001; Kneale, 2005). As a result, Kennedy et al. (2006).
Thus, Learning outcomes are becoming the most useful goals during teaching and learning, especially on the use of Moodle. Note the developed and an operational definition of Learning outcomes that “Learning outcomes are statement of what a learner is expected to know, understand and/or be able to demonstrate after completion of a process of learning”. In addition to that, various studies share parallel views in defining learning outcomes (Brown, Race, & Smith, 2004; Khoza- , 2013c; Spiller, 2013; Stein et al., 2013). These studies aver that learning outcomes referred to attributes such as skills, knowledge, and values a student may be expected to achieve at the end of each programme; learning outcomes can be any expected and general competences that are expected to be attained by students. Khoza- (2013c) and Mpungose* (2016) outline that learning outcomes are driven by informal reflections because it is concerned about students’ intentions (societal needs), and they are not on the side of the lecturer (lecturer-centred) but they are on the side of the student (student-centred) when a programme or a module is offered. That is the reason why learning outcome are defined as “a statement of what the learner is expected to know, understand and/or be able to do at the end of a period of learning” (Donnelly & Fitzmaurice, 2005, p.16). Similarly, Mpungose- (2016a) and Nkohla (2017) outline that learning outcomes are what students are required to demonstrate as based on knowledge, skills, and attitudes after the programme is completed. In the context of this study, learning outcomes are what is expected of students to do (practice/skill), to know (knowledge) and to think about (attitude) in the use of Moodle LMP. In other words, learning outcomes has to do with addressing the societal needs of students when using Moodle. In other words, lecturers are expected to reflect on how students’
societal needs are addressed when using Moodle during the teaching and learning of the Physical Science modules.
Moreover, Kennedy et al. (2006), Donnelly and Fitzmaurice (2005), and Stein et al. (2013), outlines that traditionally teaching and learning of modules in HEIs, was driven by lecture-centred approach where lecturers were guided by the content of the module, and by what is prescribed or
138
planned to be taught and assessed. These studies further indicated demerits of this approach which includes that it focuses on lecturers’ directives and what is going to be assessed based on the prescribed content. On the contrary, it does not indicate clearly as to what is expected of students to do and achieve. In other words, this approach is embedded in principles of formal and personal reflection (personal and module need) (Mpungose*, 2016; Pedro, 2005). However, the global and international trend in higher education shows the move from lecturer-approach to student-approach in order to cater for societal needs (students’ needs) (Kennedy et al., 2006). For this reason, LMPs like Moodle are frequently adopted in order to cater to student’s needs (Govender & Khoza, 2017).
Moreover, the benefits of student-approach is to put more focus on what the student are expected to attain during the teaching and learning process, and that is the reason why the phenomenon of learning outcomes is mostly considered in HEIs; this approach is sometimes called outcome-based (Amory-, 2015; Jansen, 1997; Khoza*, 2016b). This assertion in in line with the purpose of introducing Moodle LMP in HEIs so that societal needs (student) is entrenched by lecturers who are driven by learning outcomes when using Moodle for teaching and learning of a module.
According Donnelly and Fitzmaurice (2005), learning outcomes may be designed for a course, a programme, or an entire institution. Thus, in the context of this study, lecturers are reflecting on the learning outcomes on the use of Moodle resources. In other words, the study is not concerned with lecturers’ input but rather with lecturers’ output of the use of Moodle (Marsh, 2009).
Furthermore, Kiriakidis (2013) and Khoza- (2013c) assert that one of the benefits of using learning outcomes by lecturers when teaching is that, it is a clear statement giving a direction to student as what and how is expected of them to attain the particular goal of that programme in place. Thus,
“learning outcomes can be considered as a sort of common currency that assists modules and programmes to be more transparent at both local level and at international level” (Kennedy et al., 2006, p. 6) . This suggests that learning outcomes should be measureable or observed from each student’s performance (Mpungose-, 2016a; Nkohla, 2017). For this reason, Bloom (1956) introduces three domains, namely: Cognitive domain (knowing component of learning), Affective domain (emotional component of learning), and Psycho-motor domain (skills component of learning). Informal reflection places a greater focus on the cognitive domain such that lecturers are expected to use their informal reflection in order to measure and observe student performance by
139
following the hierarchy or classification of the cognitive domain levels according to their ascending order, namely: 1 Knowledge, 2. Comprehension, 3. Application, 4. Analysis, 5.
Synthesis, and 6. Evaluation; refer to Figure 3.8 below (Bloom, 1956; Fink, 2013; Kennedy et al., 2006).
Figure 3.8 Benjamin Bloom’s Cognitive levels of learning outcomes, adopted from Khoza (2016 p.)
Moreover, there are allocated key words that are to be used in each of these above-indicated levels in order to create or develop a meaningful learning outcomes and those key words ensure justice on thinking ability of each student (Fry & Ketteridge, 2000; Ion et al., 2013; Khoza-, 2013c). In other words, these levels cater for the societal needs of all learners with different cognitive capabilities. Bloom (1956), as well as Bloom, Krathwohl, and Masia (1984), assert that most needs of students are catered in level one, includes keywords like, defines, describes, identifies, knows, labels, lists, matches, in order to remember the concepts; key words used for level two are for understanding, such as, gives an example, converts, understands, defends, estimates, explains;
level three is for application, such key words are used applies, changes, compose, constructs,
140
demonstrates, discovers; in level four, students are expected to analyses, breaks down, compares, contrasts, differentiates; level five is for evaluation, such key words may be used, appraises, compares, concludes, contrasts, criticises, critiques, defends, describes and others; and lastly creation which includes key words like, categorises, combines, compiles, composes, creates, devises, designs, explains, generates, modifies. This articulation indicates that learning outcomes of using Moodle should be influenced by informal reflection all levels in order to move from low order, middle-order, and to higher order thinking levels of the societal needs (Boud et al., 2013;
Tadesse & Gillies, 2015). As a result, justice is done when aims, objectives, as well as learning outcomes, are clearly stated on the use of Moodle goals to ensure justice to any curriculum through Moodle teaching and learning activities (Le Grange* & Reddy, 2017; Waghid- & Davids, 2016).
The above discussion on goals indicates the trends that without goals in place, during the use of Moodle, there will be no justice, and these suggest that goals may be referred to as justice. Thus, justice is linked to Moodle teaching activities through the process of reflection.