5.3 Data Presentation 112
5.3.2 Theme Two: Object 119
Nemser, 2001). Experience holds a vital role in dealing with observable and measurable outcomes in range of proper use of assessment which includes evaluating skills, attitudes and knowledge. This experience has been supported by a Diploma in Information Technology, Honours and Masters in Educational Technology and PhD in Curriculum Studies and Educational Technology that the facilitator possesses. This then suggests that he is well qualified and experienced to undertake the facilitating of the module.
In South Africa there is a shortage of Educational Technology lecturers. Ravjee (2007) attributes this deficiency to a lack of policies and structures in higher education institutions regarding Educational Technology, and the time associated with learning new vocabulary. In addition lecturers do not have the pedagogical skills, peer communities or WBTL guidelines to maintain online environments. As a result lectures are unqualified, and the ones who are qualified leave for better employment opportunities elsewhere due to insufficient salary requirements. Prensky (2001) identified lecturers who did not know how to use the emerging technologies in WBTL as
‘digital immigrants’ because it was unnatural to them, therefore they had to learn to use them.
This was in contrast to ‘digital natives’ whom as technology progressed, so too did they develop their technological skills, attitudes and knowledge about learning with WBTL platforms. Based on this rationale the researcher has identified the facilitator in this study as a digital native because he has the knowledge, skills, attitude and values in facilitating using online tools for teaching and learning. His years of experience and qualification also contribute to this assumption.
The role of the facilitator can be understood as one who disseminates information in accordance with the relevant learning outcomes that must be achieved. Facilitators are also responsible for designing, selecting and applying appropriate learning activities that ensure the achievement of the intended outcomes of a module (SLO, 2008). In this sense the researcher ascertained, through the various data generation techniques, that the facilitator of the course in this study was instrumental in implementing the various learning activities in the context of curriculum issues, in alignment with the learning outcomes designed. According to Van den Akker, de Boer, Folmer, Kuiper, Letschert, Nieveen and Thijs (2009) the facilitator assumes a teacher role in the spider web curriculum. The teacher represents the initiator as one who starts or directs the learning process. Therefore it was observed that the facilitator would lead students through each part of the lecture in using online resources to administer the content of the module.
transformed into outcomes with the assistance of physical and symbolic external and internal mediating instruments, tools and signs (Engeström, 1993). In other words the object is the goal of the activity. It has also been used interchangeably with the motives for participating in an activity, or a comparison with the material product that participants attempt to achieve through an activity (Yamagata-Lynch, 2010). Primarily the object is the reason why people opt to participate in an activity because proper establishment of the objectives sets the subjects in a clear cut direction of having purpose and achieving goals. Drawing from these perceptions the researcher identified the content of the module as the object in this study. The table below illustrates an outline of the module content.
Tentative dates Themes to be covered
14/02/2013 Introduction and definitions/perspectives of curriculum 21/02/2013 Curriculum in development
28/02/2013 Curriculum design theories
07/03/2013 Aims, objectives and learning outcomes
14/03/2013 Online curriculum design theories and other relevant resources
21/03/2013 Evaluation / Assessment of Online curriculum and Proposal development 28/03/2013 Proposal development
04/04/2013 Teaching with learner-centred approach (Curriculum Context) 11/04/2013 Online teaching with learner-centred approach (Curriculum Context) 18/04/2013 Historical Development of Curriculum Change in South Africa 25/04/2013 The Politics of Curriculum Change in South Africa
02/05/2013 The Official Curriculum in South Africa: OBE / NCS / CAPS and Curriculum Change
09/05/2013 Educator Competency and Curriculum Change as well as Revision 16/05/2013 Revision
Table 5.1 Outline of Module Content
According to Van den Akker, de Boer, Folmer, Kuiper, Letschert, Nieveen and Thijs (2009) the
‘content’ determines what students learn and the ‘learning activities’ suggest how they are learning (p. 39). Hardman (2008) affirms these sentiments by adding that the object of an activity system aims to develop and reinforce students’ content knowledge. Table 5.1 above represents the main topics that emerged through document analysis via the online learning space. Students were also given a hard copy for their personal files. The content topics appeared to accommodate all the areas or issues of curriculum that needed to be learned in the module.
Consequently this infused observable and measurable learning outcomes. The facilitator used the learning outcomes to evaluate students’ performance in terms of understanding the content.
However Khoza (2013a) cautions that outcomes that use words such as ‘understand, know and learn’ are difficult to measure or observe. Therefore, the facilitator stated all the intended outcomes of the module at the beginning of each lecture to maintain a relationship with the content. In this section the issue of content cannot be interrogated in isolation because the components of an activity system are related and thereby in constant interaction (Thuraisingam
et al., 2012). As such the components of the spider web curriculum support the rationale and are consistent with each other. This further reveals that there is a good relationship between aims/objectives, content and outcomes that signify a good learning signal (Khoza, 2013b).
The literature has addressed the argument of hard-ware (HW), soft-ware (SW) and ideological- ware (IW) to represent awareness of teaching and learning strategies or resources. Rutishauser- Chappelle (2007) contends that these are important in WBTL environments because they create educational opportunities that would be otherwise difficult to reach. IW is symbolic of teaching and learning strategies, research findings, theories of teaching and learning, and experiences.
Thus the researcher has identified content (object) as IW because the module contains such issues. Through document analysis it was discovered that the content included theories of learning such as Activity Theory, Entertainment Education Theory, Curriculum Design Research and Online Curriculum Design Theories to help students with their understanding of curriculum issues. Further paradigms of learning were also explored to assist students with their assessment tasks. Students were able to access these through the online learning space, which were available for downloading for personal study and to converse with during lectures.
Figure 5.1 Learning Guide (Retrieved from the online learning space)
The above figure 5.1 represents the content topics (IW) that were retrieved via the Curriculum Context and Change module learning site (The name of the university and participants have been blocked to adhere to the ethical regulations of this study). It was observed that students were able to access each topic listed and download them for analysis. The Figure also illustrates that research paradigms and learning theories were part of the content material used for teaching and learning. The dates indicated show that each week a new piece of content was introduced.
Online and offline theories of learning were incorporated into teaching and learning. The premise surrounding this was not to overshadow face-to-face methods of delivery but rather embrace it to combine HW, SW and IW resources to promote better learning avenues for students through a blended learning approach (Khoza, 2013c).
To determine whether the content was relevant to the learning outcomes the researcher put the following question to the facilitator during the interview:
Researcher: “Do you believe that the module content is relevant to the learning outcomes of the module? Why?”
Facilitator: “Curriculum Context and Change involves online and offline curriculum design knowledge, skills and values/attitude as well as the evaluation of any curriculum… The projects require the students’ understanding and use of ideological-ware, hard-ware and soft-ware, e.g.
curriculum theories that integrate different hard-ware, soft-ware into learning. This helps students with curriculum design/building with relevant resources and critical analysis. This then leads to better educational opportunities.”
This suggests that learning contexts that include WBTL have to inculcate a strong awareness of HW, SW and IW into teaching and learning of the content material. It also postulates that by implementing these three principles it will create better learning and educational opportunities for students. Further this means that facilitators have to be aware of teaching and learning principles when administering the content in a WBTL environment because they have to use learning strategies that are consistent with their students’ level of learning. Coincidentally these support the rationale of the spider web curriculum determining what students learn (content) and why. In terms of the outcomes these will be discussed in greater detail at a later stage.
Hesham and Wing (2004) advocate that WBTL platforms have the potential to reach all kinds of students that can accommodate slow learners and minimise the gap between the differences in academic performances. Such contexts utilise different learning styles that inculcate a learner- centred approach to teaching and learning. In reviewing the content topics in Table 5.1 it appears
to specifically point out the exploration of learner-centred approaches. The following comments were made during the focus group interview from participants:
P8: “I found the curriculum topics/issues discussed meaningful because it gave us (students) the opportunity to find out about things like CAPS that we were unclear about through debates and discussions.”
P10: “The content broadened my thinking, especially as a high school teacher because it helped me better understand curriculum change in South Africa so this can help me develop as an educator and in so doing [help] my learners”
These comments suggest that the content of the module was appropriate because the learning outcomes included that students should be able to determine curriculum change. It also engaged them in critical thinking through class discussions/debates (face-to-face) by viewing the content (object) online, using journal articles and other learning material. The comments further indicate that the facilitator used a learner-centred approach because he allowed students to take in charge of their own learning by drawing from their own experiences and ideas about curriculum.
It was observed that students would frequently talk about their classroom encounters and school policy in their current school of occupation. This was then compared to the content they were learning about during the lectures. They wanted to determine whether what they were learning about at university was actually taking place in their classrooms at schools. This was particularly significant because schools in South Africa were in the process of adapting and implementing the new Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) and since its inception there have been some misconceptions. Based on the workshops that some students attended through the Department of Education, and what was conceptualised in the lecture discussions, they needed to ascertain what actually should be taking place in the teaching and learning environment.