MC-DIP

1.0 Tensions: Multicultural education, Learning styles, Web 2.0 “…loss of one’s culture is a painful experience; it is the loss of oneself. For the most part, people struggle to retain their culture. It is the basis of their sense of identity, the source of their psycho-sociological strength. Behaviour which brings a person honour in his own culture may bring ridicule or condemnation in the new…. Caught in the upheaval of meaning, the newcomer is confused, upset, frustrated and easily may become aggressive, hostile, or emotionally upset” (Rita Dunn & Shirley A Griggs) 1.1 Multicultural education perspective A multicultural perspective on the design of teaching and learning inevitably challenges and rejects racism and other forms of discrimination in our educational institutions and society and accepts and affirms the pluralism (ethnic, racial, linguistic, religious, economic and gender, among others) that students, communities and educators reflect. This reflects the major academic viewpoint on multicultural education over the past 30 years (Banks, 1995). The quote below I refer to frequently in illustrating the important in providing relevant education for the learners in your classrooms and workplace for how they live there lives and experience the world around them. This needs to come from the educator but also fellow learners “My students, many times, are urged to forget who they are, or told that they must ‘become American’, as if they could. The message that they get many times is that they must discard themselves of their own racial, ethnic or linguistic identity. In their attempt to assimilate, many of them lose themselves. They get frustrated because no matter how much they try, they will never be accepted as ‘American’. Others, because they resent the message that they must shed every facet of their own identity, resist the pressure and alienate themselves. These students usually drop out of formal education, get in trouble with the law (authorities) and are put in jail or deported. It seems that those who become bicultural have a strong sense of identity that adds balance in their lives……” Ambrizeth Lima (Quote from a study by Sonia Neito) For example a typical University in England has a high proportion of what is classed as ethnic minority groups (25-30%). In time these minorities may become majorities such as in California where the majority language in schools is Hispanic. The EU as positive action for all publishes all documentation in 25 EU languages. This approach has a cost to implement but with significant benefits for intercultural dialogue and supporting national and individual identity. In comparison how many of our teachers are from ethnic minority backgrounds and are our University reflecting the communities we live in? 1.2 Learning Style It is viewed learning styles is generally de-valued and misunderstood. What do you think about learning styles? For those with basic teacher training or some educational knowledge this general means…. visual, auditory and kinesthetic learning. While this is the weakest area of learning styles research and is only a small part of what this area of education practice represents. The cognitive learning styles research that is routed in cognitive behavior is represented by many research studies and to a lesser extent the work in the area of perception and related visual, auditory and kinesthetic research. This is intended to illustrate the need for embedding learning styles more deeply into the teacher education process. Such an approach would also lead to improved pedagogy equity through knowledge acquisition and practice. Cognitive style and Learning style have been widely and frequently used interchangeably by educational theorists, human resource management specialists and other management consultants over the past fifty years or more. Terminology has varied and continues to evolve although many (e.g. Witkin et al, 1971; Goldstein and Blackman, 1978; Tennant, 1988; Biggs & Moore, 1993; Riding & Pearson, 1994) agree that cognitive style is a distinct and consistent way for an individual to encode, store and perform, and one that is mainly independent of intelligence. It is viewed by many, even though limited in understanding that cognitive style differences between human beings were possibly due to differences in left/right hemispheric specialisation of the brain. Such a viewpoint is led through eminent research studies (e.g. Sperry, 1964; Luria, 1966; Bogen, 1969) undertaken during the 1960s, which demonstrated that the left cerebral hemisphere specialised primarily in analytic, rational and sequential information processing and the right cerebral hemisphere specialised primarily in intuitive, holistic, and simultaneous information processing (Armstrong, 1999). This could potentially extend further through the co-evolution of psychology and neuroscience which brings together the understanding of the relationship of what the system does and also knowledge about how the underlying neural system operates (Sadler-Smith, 2001). Various frameworks have been suggested in an attempt to de-mystify the relationship between cognitive style and learning style and as an attempt to embed ‘best practice’ into both the research and practitioner orientated community. Curry (1983) provides a useful framework through his suggested ‘onion’ model in which learning constructs are organized into three levels that overlay a central personality dimension. These are as follows: •The inner layer is the cognitive personality elements, such as the cognitive style •The second layer is the ‘information processing style’, typically the learning style •While the outer layer consists of learning preferences. From the research of Curry it is suggested that the nearer the surface the more amenable a construct is to introspection and external influence. This framework was extended further by work of Cheema (1991) who introduced the notion of ‘learning strategies’ which are viewed as being outside of the domain of cognitive processing and frequently referred to as ‘style’. Riding (1997) extended the Curry framework by introducing a ‘cognitive control model’ consisting of an elaboration of the following elements: •primary resources (knowledge, personality, gender, and cognitive history), •cognitive control (cognitive style dimensions of Wholist-Analytical and Verbaliser-Imagery) •cognitive inputs (perception) •cognitive outputs (learning strategies) •external world (experience and observed behaviours) Learning is clearly influenced by the context of the environment and for many has added a new dimension into exploring the importance of designing learning environments. Sadler-Smith (2001) made this point in identifying that a principle objection to notions of learning styles tools is their limited consideration to the social context within which learning takes place. This comment can also be extended to the need for more research into the importance of cultural background in the context of race, ethnicity, language, gender and religion plus many more factors. Table 1 below is synthesis of research in the area and identifies important elements when considering multiculturalism and learning styles. Table 1 – Multiculturalism & Learning styles 1.3 Role of Web 2.0 for Pedagogy Equity E-Learning 2.0 represents the shift towards peer-to-peer push technologies that has enabled distributed MLE (Managed Learning Environment) architectures. Such technologies and processes include: RSS, syndication, Blogging, PLE’s, Wiki’s, file sharing, ICQ. Whilst pedagogical research is concentrating on technological innovation continues .XML and related technologies have formed the basis for new methods for creating and delivering content from RSS aggregators, portals, APIs (application programming interfaces) and Web Services. Content is also being provided to be re-used in bespoke ‘widgets’, such as calendars, through the use of Microformats. Other services available include Flickr and Del.icio.us that supports syndication and has been enabled through OpenAPI’s. Google allows both the personalisation of the content displayed interface and searching preferences. Searches that becomes more tailored to the individual as the algorithm learns about the individual. It is clearly close to see the emergence of similar developments within education and small dedicated ‘widgets’ or collections of these to serve educational content or services to future learners. The effect of XML on the generation of content has been extensive, meaning that the authoring process has changed in line with technological change. These newer technologies have enabled collaborative methods of content creation that can be delivered in small bite-sized chunks (and supporting Tagging), and that can be searched extensively due to the meaningful way in which the content is marked-up. The inclusion of metadata standards is a vital aspect to this process, and the semantic web will need this information to provide the sorts of services that will be expected. Wendy Hall, in 2004, stated that the network was vital to the success of a technology. (Hall, 2004) Vannevar Bush, in 1945, expressed the need for harnessing all human knowledge over tools that increased human physical abilities. Amongst the new potentialities of the Semantic Web is the possibility of personalised learning environments. However, it remains to be seen how the fundamental differences between collaborative social learning and individualised learning will be resolved. Another aspect currently being considered is that of the Personalised Learning Environment (PLE), which is making its first steps and seems integral to the movement for portfolios. It seems logical to integrate portfolios, learning styles, diagnostics within a PLE. MC-DIP project working with the extensive tools developed by Knownet such as Knotes and Bloggability offers the potential for an imaginative and useful PLE that supports the needs of a diverse learning community. The MC-DIP diagnostic tool has gradually evolved since 2000 and current Minerva funding has enable significant improvements in the context of multiculturalism, learning styles and other related factors. 2.0 Experiences: MultiCultural Diagnostic Information Profiling (MC-DIP) “in a globalised economy, the future lies with people who can think and act with informed grace across ethnic, cultural, linguistic lines”(Banks, 2000). The proposed research into multicultural diagnostic tools to support culturally sensitive Personalised Learning Environment (PLE’s) is based on a need to directly support ethnic minority and social migrants in e-learning developments and as a consequence supporting improved knowledge transfer in our learning communities. PLE’s offer the potential to support learners with applications for aggregating content feeds through an extensive range of e-learning 2.0 applications (Farmer (2006). It is intended that the DC-DIP diagnostic will support self reflection and the ability to filter content through feed to support personal and group learning styles needs. This can be used to directly support a core challenge of helping to combat racism and xenophobia (Article 13 of the EC Treaty) and to offset the effects of socio-economic disadvantages (European Commission Joint Report on Social Inclusion, 2003). Our rationale for the research project is to combat social exclusion through directly influencing the development of Personalised Learning Environment (PLE) through the use of multicultural diagnostic tools to support the needs of the learners, ethnic minority groups and social migrants, rather than supporting the needs of the system (Green, Facer and Rudd, 2006). In particular the primary aim of the overall project is the development of multicultural diagnostic tools in supporting the development of personalised learning that is culturally sensitive. The rationale for the multicultural diagnostic tools is that (1) there is a need to influence current knowledge and developments on culture in the context of content design and learning design standards; (2) decision makers and developers need support tools specific to culture and diversity in the PLE adoption and development process; (3) and ethnic minority groups and social migrants are not being currently supported in a proactive way in the delivery of e-learning (technology enhanced learning). This will directly tackle social exclusion within specific ethnic minority groups and social migrants through positive action through the emergence of e-learning 2.0 by focusing on co-operation and exchange through push technologies. The MC-DIP diagnostic comprises of 4 modules that represents personal learning styles with additional related variables of importance including motivation and subject specific context. The modules are outlined below. 1. Culture: Race, Ethnicity, Language, and Identity This module directly addresses cultural diversity with a hope of better understanding the type of information and learning that will be of the most interest and relevance. There is little direction given on the style of answers required as the interpretation of the statement itself provides information on the individual’s pattern of thinking. 2. Cognitive Learning Styles: Physical, Emotional & Mental Learners are catagorised into three types– ‘physically orientated’, ‘emotionally orientated’, and ‘mentally orientated’. This is supported from European research from for example Riding and Cheema Cognitive Styles Analysis (CSA). In particular the Wholist-Analytical (WA) dimension. In broad terms: ‘mentally orientated’ referring to many of the characteristics of ‘Analytical’, ‘emotionally orientated’ referring to many of the characteristics of Wholist, and ‘physically orientated’ pulling from both Wholist-Analytical (WA). In addition significant recognition also needs to be given to the extensive research of Dunn & Dunn on learning styles and Dunn & Griggs specific to multiculturalism and learning styles in the Americas. 3. Learning Preferences: Physiological & Perceptual Module 3 deals with learning preference by determining whether they are a ‘visual’, ‘auditory’ or ‘kinaesthetic/tactile’ learner. The results from the section will be MC-DIP aggregator to determine how the information from Delicious and Flickr will be delivered. The information may also be useful to a teacher in planning a learning session or in assessing a learner and allowing some dispensation for the difficulty the learner may be experiencing due to the style of learning. 4. Creativity in Context: Creative Thinking, Task Motivation, and Expertise Module 4 concentrates on the learners creativity levels and extends specific factors within the domain of cognitive behaviour and learning. This module focuses on problem solving skills, motivation and subject expertise. This module is significantly influenced by the research of Teresa Amabile (1991). 3.0 Share Lessons “Multicultural education is a liberatory project whose purpose is to help all students think and act critically and beyond their limited self-interest” Sonia Neito Learning styles is led by US, European, Australian research and with limited research outside of these regions. Rita Dunn and colleagues are the exceptions but this is still limited to minority groups living in the Americas. Extensive research is needed in US, European and Australia in the context of learning styles and multiculturalism. Even more important is research in developing and under developed countries. Some important issues to reflect on: •Potentially changing to balance of power between teacher and learner •If you are exploring learning styles in context of learner need to be aware of biases bringing to the classroom. What is the teachers learning style? Share this with learners … •Personalised learning paths. This can be design in a content and/or learning design perspective. Activity based perspective follow multicultural education framework •Need for teacher training on learning styles and how to proactively integrate into curriculum •Challenging for teachers and learners. •Software diagnostic potentially makes personalised learning financially viable