Patterns for the use of CLIL in design and architectural teaching in online media

ARCHI21 is an EU-funded project which aims to get students to use 3D virtual immersive and Web 2.0 environments and to promote the potentialities of these environments in the fields of architecture and design. By adopting a CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) approach, ARCHI21 also seeks to facilitate language learning, while accompanying the process of competence building in architecture and design.

ARCHI21 involves six institutional partners in four countries: - Coordination : École nationale supérieure d’architecture de Paris Malaquais (ENSA-PM, France) ; - Centre international d’études pédagogiques (CIEP, France) ; - The Open University (OP, United Kingdom); - Univerza v Ljubljani – Fakulteta za Arhitekturo (UL-FA, Slovenia); - Aalbord Universitet (AAU, Denmark) ; - The University of Southampton (SO, United Kingdom).

1

A document produced by Georgina Holden, Nicole Schadewitz-Lotz, Theodore Zamenopoulos and Katerina Alexiou, The Open University, UK.

2

Table of contents Learning design ..................................................................................................................................................... 8 Pattern 1: Prepare to progress................................................................................................................... 8 Pattern 2: Technology that fits.................................................................................................................10 Pattern 3: Keep it personal ........................................................................................................................12 Pattern 4: Got it? Use it................................................................................................................................14 Pattern 5: Cultural understanding..........................................................................................................15 Pedagogy in action .............................................................................................................................................16 Pattern 6: Paint the picture .......................................................................................................................16 Pattern 7: Like for like .................................................................................................................................18 Pattern 8: Adapt to survive .......................................................................................................................19 Institutional ...........................................................................................................................................................20 Pattern 9: Embed in the institution........................................................................................................20 Pattern 10: Technology that works........................................................................................................22 Table 1: Pattern 2 Technology that fits: A summary of affordances, advantages and disadvantages..................................................................................................................................................23 Benchmark design patterns ...........................................................................................................................26 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................................26 Pattern 1: The slow road to illumination.............................................................................................28 Pattern 2: Do as I do .....................................................................................................................................30 Pattern 3: No teller without listener......................................................................................................32 Pattern 5: Breathing .....................................................................................................................................36 Pattern 6: Wear your skills ........................................................................................................................37 Pattern 7: Know me better ........................................................................................................................39 Pattern 8: Lurking design crit...................................................................................................................41 Pattern 9: Learn to practice, practice to learn ...................................................................................42 Pattern 10: Local community meeting .................................................................................................44 Pattern 11: Annotated artifacts ...............................................................................................................47 Pattern 12: Stories of a special teacher ................................................................................................48 Interviews with ARCHI21 partners: Coded extracts ............................................................................49

3

Introduction This document presents patterns for the use of CLIL in design and architecture delivered through online media. The patterns were identified in the course of the ARCHI21 project: Architectural and Design based Education and Practice through Content & Language Integrated Learning using Immersive Virtual Environments for 21st Century Skills. The majority of the work was part of Workpackage 8: patterns for language learning in a design context.

More specifically, the aims of Workpackage 8 were the following : 1. To identify benchmark patterns in the context of design education in English 2. To use the identified patterns to guide language learning in design 3. To identify new patterns specific to non-English students The term ‘pattern’ should be understood in the context of pattern language methodology. The concept of pattern was first introduced by the architect Christopher Alexander (1977, 1979) in order to describe a systematic way to capture and communicate solutions to reoccurring problems. Since then, patterns have been explored as a method in Software Development (Gamma, Helm, Johnson, & Vlissides, 1995), Localization (Mahemoff & Johnston, 1999), CSCW (Lukosch & Schümmer, 2006) and Pedagogy (Eckstein, 2000; Avgeriou, 2003; Winters & Mor, 2008). Alexander (1977) proposed that a pattern is a good solution to a problem in a certain context. Design patterns capture best practice in a specific professional domain, allowing its reuse. They support communication among stakeholders and offer a “lingua franca” for design communication (Erickson, 2000). Each pattern describes the context, scope and validity of a design solution, underlining its principles and providing examples.

Patterns are interrelated, cross-referenced and organized in collections. This allows the discovery of related problems and solutions in more complex design situations.

For the purpose of this project, patterns refer to learning and teaching practices that use online media in the context of design education. The focus is on the integration of language learning with design learning. The teaching elements of the project comprised several workshops conducted over two years using a variety of communication media. The commonality of all of these workshops was the engagement of students, architecture or design teachers, and CLIL teachers and teachers. The patterns, or guidelines for practice, were distilled from observations of teaching sessions, student feedback and interviews with all partners. The patterns present a series of points for consideration when adopting a content and language integrated learning approach in the context of architecture and design teaching. Appendix 2 includes a table with the coded data from the interviews.

4

Methodology: how patterns were identified This section reports the work delivered for WP8 from a methodological perspective. Overall, the aim was to create a pattern collection of best practices in language learning in the context of design education. A design pattern was approached as a structured way to describe good practices within a specific domain of expertise. Design patterns describe a recurring problem, the context in which it occurs, and a possible solution (in this case expressed as implications).

Each pattern is also specified by related patterns. Related patterns enable the creation of a network or ecosystem of related practices and therefore help navigation from one pattern to another.

Deliverable 8.1 focused on the identification of benchmark patterns in the context of design education in English. The benchmark patterns were the result of outcomes from observations and analysis of student activity and performance at the three distance learning compulsory design courses of the BA/BSc in Design and Innovation at the Open University. Between them the three courses teach around 2000 students each year, who are predominantly English speakers.

The core objective was to set a benchmark of good practice to guide successful language learning in the context of design studio teaching. The benchmark patterns that are included in Appendix 1, were produced in the early stages of the ARCHI21 project to inform and assist the research.

Deliverables 8.2 and 8.3 aimed to introduce a new online technology (The Open Design Studio or ODS) to the project partners as a way to further collect data for pattern construction. The objective was that partner institutions for collaborative tasks would use this technology with non-English speaking students. The OU produced two documents around ODS training which are published separately. Training was delivered as planned and the platform was used in WP4 with French students. However, due to unforeseen technical issues with ODS, which was found late on in development, not to recognise Slovenian characters, the platform could not be used in WP5 or WP6.

As part of deliverable 8.3, the OU team also offered two recorded training sessions on pattern construction (28/06/2011 and 28/09/2011) using the benchmark patterns for guidance.

The core objective of these training sessions was that each project partner would contribute in the construction of patterns. However, in discussion with partners it was realized that it was more efficient and effective to conduct structured (but open-ended) interviews with each project partner to develop patterns on their behalf. The interviews focused on the following items: -

The context of work and the work undertaken Conditions/constraints that effected the work undertaken Problems/challenges for CLIL, use of technologies and institutional collaboration Identified solutions and best practices

5

Deliverables 8.4 and 8.6 aimed to analyse the above data and then use this analysis as the basis for the construction of patterns. The data from the interviews were coded by two members of the Open University team into the following emerging themes (see Appendix 2 for more details): -

the multidisciplinary nature of CLIL the implementation of CLIL in design education the choice, affordances and use of technology language/design skills development

These themes were further subdivided into more specific problems/challenges and solutions that were identified and supported by the interviewees’ comments and evidence (see Appendix 2 for more details). Using this analysis a number of patterns were created as presented in the following section.

Clarification of terms used in this document To aid the explanation of this document the following clarifications are offered : Where the term « in-house language teacher » is used it refers to a member of institutional staff who has experience working with students and in most cases experience in working with content teachers.

The term « external language teacher » refers to a language teacher that is not a member of the institutional staff. External language teachers have experience working with students but in most cases do not have experience in working with content teachers.

Where the term « external language mediator » is used it refers to a person trained by Southampton in CLIL and CYBERGOGY during the ARCHI21 project.

This person is not a member of the institutional staff and mediates between the students and the teacher as an external language teacher with particular emphasis upon language acquisition and resolving language difficulties. Some mediators have a technical expertise being well versed in in-world teaching techniques and most mediators are language teachers. External language mediators had no prior understanding of the architectural discipline and were not involved in planning learning sessions.

The term « content teacher » refers to teachers of architecture or design in partner institutions.

6

Patterns: CLIL in design and architecture The patterns constructed are presented in this section. In order to facilitate the connectivity and conceptual relation among patterns, a number of related patterns are specified at the end of each pattern. In principle, the specified links create a hyperspace or ecosystem of related patterns. At a more general level, the patterns can be organized into three broad categories (see Figure 1):  Learning design: These patterns describe reiterating challenges and solutions in the context of designing learning environments for CLIL in design and architecture  Pedagogy in action: These patterns describe reiterating challenges and solutions related to pedagogy and delivery of teaching materials that integrate language and design learning  Institutional: These patterns describe reiterating challenges and solutions related to institutional needs and constraints

Figure 1 Three classes of patterns for the use of CLIL in design and architecture

7

Learning design Pattern 1: Prepare to progress Integration of language development with design learning requires specialist mentoring in preparation for design tasks in the target language.

The Context One example, of the many learning situations that were used in the course of the ARCHI21 project, is a studio intensive workshop, which took place over 5 days, in which external language experts adopted a CLIL approach to language integration. However, this was not well received as reflective language learning was seen by students as interrupting the flow of design thinking. Content teachers also found the addition of language work into this situation difficult.

Content teachers had difficulty giving up disciplinary boundaries and handing over specific resources and teaching materials to linguistics experts because of the open-ended nature of design learning. These issues lead to a disjuncture between the goals of content and language teachers.

However, greater success was experienced in separate teaching situations where students were asked to develop a design and present their ideas to an audience. Where an in-house language expert working closely with content specialists assisted students individually with the preparation of presentations in the target language this facilitated trans-institutional communication.

Another initiative, the development of online resources (language objects), developed as a collaboration between content, language and e-learning specialists show promise as an asynchronous way of developing vocabulary and contextual understanding. These might usefully be used as part of the preparation for real-time teaching with content and language specialists.

The Challenge In house language teachers:

Language goals need to be integrated into the planning of content teaching from the beginning to facilitate student acceptance.

Content teachers:

Architecture and design teachers find the addition of language work within a short intensive studio project difficult. Because of the nature of design education, content teachers have difficulty giving up disciplinary boundaries and handing over resources to external linguistics experts leading to a disjuncture between the goals of content and language teachers.

8

Implications General

o For the CLIL approach to be successful, it is important for teaching tasks to be planned jointly by content teachers and linguists. o CLIL needs to be planned in from the start of a course of study so that it is seen as an integral part of the teaching strategy. o Online resources such as specially designed learning objects, can be used to aid the development of context specific language, particularly vocabulary building and as preparation for CLIL content and languages teachers.

In-house language teachers:

o One to one and small group support can be an effective way of providing CLIL support o It is important to understand the discipline context well in order to adjust language teaching strategies to the specific context. For that purpose, it may be worth considering ‘in-house’ language teachers.

Content teachers:

o When planning design teaching with CLIL it is vital to involve language teachers in the planning and goals for the course as early as possible. o It is important to understand the strategy for language teaching to effectively allocate time and plan the course.

Related Patterns CULTURAL UNDERSTANDING GOT IT, USE IT KEEP IT PERSONAL

9

Pattern 2: Technology that fits It is important when designing online learning experiences to use the right technological interface for the learning situation.

The Context During the ARCHI21 project several different online platforms were trialled. The platforms varied in the degree of immersion, from the fully immersive virtual worlds of Second Life and vAcademia, to the semi-immersive virtual conferencing systems of AdobeConnect and GoToMeeting and the nonimmersive presentation tool of Knovio. These platforms were, at times supported by other tools such as Skype, Wiggio, Wikis, FlashMeeting and email to assist participants and to exchange information and files.

The immersive experience of Second Life proved to be very successful in a distance learning context where students had no possibility of face-to-face engagement. However, it was of more qualified success in face-to-face settings because the effort of learning how to use the interface, was not seen as having relative advantage over face-to-face contact. None-the-less the interface was successfully used for critiquing and touring architectural sites and presenting work. In the distance learning setting collaborative use of the in world building tools was welcomed by participants. However, to support language acquisition and design work adjustments were needed to the virtual space to create breakout areas in which discussions could take place between small groups of students.

Subsequently other less immersive platforms were used to enable students to discuss and present their work in ways more familiar to users of social media.

See Table 1 below for a summary of affordances, advantages and disadvantages of different technologies.

The Challenge Choosing the right platform for content and CLIL delivery requires consideration of the affordances of each platform alongside learning objectives. Consideration needs to be given to the balance of collaboration, interactivity and presentation and an interface chosen that facilitates the required level of communication.

Choosing an interface with more affordances than required may result in students finding the technology overwhelming but, on the other hand, choosing an interface with a limited palette of affordances may restrict possibilities for informal linguistic engagement. It is also possible that a combination of interfaces, for example Skype and SketchUp, may achieve most of the affordances required more simply than a more complex interface such as Second Life.

Implications General

o When planning online learning activities involving CLIL and content experts it is important to map the desired activities to the affordances of available interfaces to choose the most suitable option.

10

o If use of an online interface is considered important, then its use should be embedded in the course to make the time investment required for learning how to use it, worthwhile.

Related Patterns TECHNOLOGY THAT WORKS PREPARE TO PROGRESS KEEP IT PERSONAL

11

Pattern 3: Keep it personal Face to face contact is hard to match for the development of language skills, however, one to one contact in a digital medium can be effective if that communication is direct and focused.

The Context In face to face teaching situations language intensives are used to speed language development. The online medium offers different affordances, the chief of which is the potential to connect students in different locations, locally, nationally and internationally. In the ARCHI21 project a blend of approaches was tried at different points, these approaches ranged from individual and group meetings in face to face environments and online using such synchronous tools as Skype (Conferencing), GotoMeeting (Conferencing) and Secondlife (Virtual world), to use of the asynchronous tools such as vAcademia, Knovio and email. Each of the online approaches had its own merits and was found to be suited to different needs.

The virtual world environment was found to work well pedagogically with students in a distance learning setting where a series of workshops were offered to enhance and reinforce student learning around a set topic. However, in faceto-face teaching situations the use of a virtual world added a layer of complexity that was not seen as having sufficient benefits for continued use. The virtual world environment requires a high level of planning and preparation involving both content teachers and linguists to be successful. A cohort of external language mediators was trained in a partner institution, however, despite high levels of training both in practical aspects of in-world tools and in the use of the virtual world for teaching, using Scope’s Cybergogy model, linguistic input was constrained by the challenge of joint planning between these language mediators and content teachers in other institutions.

Conferencing tools were viewed as having greater potentiality for developing communication and presentational language skills. Their use for trans-national collaborative design work with CLIL was not tested but there are indicators that this medium might be used in this way with sufficient planning and preparation.

However success requires language teachers to be flexible and adaptable to linguistic needs in a creative experiential learning setting and to have an understanding of learning content.

Asynchronous tools were perceived as having good potential for feedback and language reinforcement by example. Miscue analysis was successfully used in Knovio to aid students in improving presentations.

The Challenge Internal and external language teachers

o Language teachers need to keep abreast with a variety of online media to teach in.

Each medium has its own affordances for teaching and learning in each specific discipline.

12

Content teachers

o Content teachers need to choose a medium or tool not only for their content teaching goals, but also a medium that facilitates language mediation.

Implications General

o Synchronous tools allow for dynamic language learning if the learning opportunities are planned into the learning goals for a teaching session. However, asynchronous tools can be usefully employed to correct language and give feedback at an individual level.

Internal language teachers

o Language specialists working in a design and architectural setting need to be able to work in a creative and uncertain experiential setting and adapt language goals to respond to and meet the needs of the students at that time.

Content teachers

o To develop relationships between learners and language specialists that facilitate language learning requires the choice of appropriate tools at appropriate times with sufficient planning to ensure that language learning is integral to the learning design rather than bolted on.

Related Patterns TECHNOLOGY THAT FITS TECHNOLOGY THAT WORKS PREPARE TO PROGRESS

13

Pattern 4: Got it? Use it If time and effort is put into the creation of resources, thought should be given to using those resources in as many ways as possible to reinforce learning.

The Context The creation of learning materials takes time and effort and, at conception, these materials are often designed for use in a specific way. For example the creation of learning objects in the ARCHI21 project for use by individual learners.

However, such materials could become the focus of dialogue and group activity.

Teaching environments such as Virtual worlds take a long time to build and the same time to be accepted by teachers and students. This acceptance can only be achieved through repetitive use.

The Challenge General

o Language teachers as well as content teachers need to be aware of existing or purposefully created teaching materials and environments to discuss the potential reuse and adoption of such for new learning goals.

Implications General

o Creative thinking about pedagogy can optimise the value of created and found learning materials. o All teachers need access to reusable teaching materials and resources so they may use them as inspiration for new CLIL sessions.

Related Patterns PREPARE TO PROGRESS

14

Pattern 5: Cultural understanding The cultures of linguists, architects and educationalists are all different, consequently pedagogical approaches vary.

The Context The Cybergogy model for engaged learning has been successfully applied in science and business domains. However, the ARCHI21 project found that application of this model was much less successful in the context of studying architecture. The reason for this appears to be that the architecture has a strongly established studio teaching culture.

The Challenge Educators from different discipline backgrounds have different cultures and concomitant expectations of pedagogic approaches. Learning and teaching approaches successful in one discipline may not be easily adopted in another unless there is a shift of cultural perception and expectation.

Implications General

o Cross cultural dialogue about the merits of different pedagogical approaches needs to take place at the start of learning design to ensure that both domain and language specialists are agreed upon and engaged with the approach to be adopted.

Related Patterns PREPARE TO PROGRESS LIKE FOR LIKE

15

Pedagogy in action Pattern 6: Paint the picture Design based subjects are very visual, this offers opportunities for language learning as images can be used as reference and discussion points.

The Context Discussions between peers and with content teachers used visual representations as the focal point and students’ final presentations were highly visual.

The project found that communication is culturally dependent. As design activity should be culturally sensitive, cross-cultural communication between students and teachers offers the opportunity both to develop linguistic skills and cultural understanding. However, an effective communication needs to be used to facilitate this.

Use of the OpenDesignStudio interface by partners in WP4 showed the potential of an online studio interface as a focus for asynchronous discussions with visual artefacts, demonstrating that a visually rich, interactive interface can mediate between the visual discipline of design students and language teaching.

The Challenge In-house language teachers:

Clarity about the use of specialist terms, particularly in a visual discipline, can only be achieved through the use of visual means. In-house language teachers with content specialist knowledge work most effectively with architectural students as this approach is inculturated in the teaching context.

Content teacher:

Content teachers need to support Language teachers with identifying precise discipline specific terms however this requires visual communication to ensure terms are properly understood and employed.

Implications General:

o Visual language can act as a bridge between linguistic and cultural differences In-house and external language teachers:

o Use of a visual communication medium between content students and language teachers allows the sharing of visual information, ensuring common points of reference and also development of discipline specific visual literacy skills.

Content teacher:

o Support the integration of textual, visual and verbal communication through design project work and presentations.

16

Related Patterns CULTURAL UNDERSTANDING

17

Pattern 7: Like for like Communication between students and language specialists is clearer and easier if everyone has a shared knowledge of the subject.

The Context Each discipline is built upon certain practices that form a domain specific culture. Where the development of a specific discipline vocabulary is necessary it is important that correct usage of terms is employed. An understanding of the semantics of the architectural language and culture is central to becoming a design professional. Linguistic understanding and development therefore needs to be embedded in the development of design skills to enable concept development and communication.

The Challenge In-house and external language teachers

Discipline specific language evolves in parallel to the development of discipline knowledge and skills. It is important for language teachers to acquire the language of the discipline, its usage and interpretation, this can be achieved through interchange with students and content teachers enriching the teacher’s knowledge and experience.

Content teachers

Content teachers and students might not be aware of their implicit teaching and learning of language use during design studio. To be able to consciously teach language associated to their discipline they need to become aware of language teaching and learning techniques.

Implications General:

o Participants need to be introduced to each other’s discipline background, teaching approaches and language use.

In-house and external language teachers

o CLIL specialists should train people who share the discipline background of the target language students as language teachers.

Content teachers

o Content teachers should ensure that language specialists are familiar with the discipline vocabulary to enable language teachers to correctly use and apply terms and constructs.

Related Patterns CULTURAL UNDERSTANDING KEEP IT PERSONAL

18

Pattern 8: Adapt to survive Students in different situations and places have different learning needs.

Successful learning occurs when these needs are met. A flexible and adaptive approach to teaching is required to ensure that the needs of different student groups are met.

The Context The ARCHI21 project partners had very different approaches to teaching design and students’ language needs, accounted for by varying institutional and cultural contexts. Approaches to learning delivery varied from entirely online teaching and collaboration; to face-to-face teaching supplemented with in-world teaching sessions; to the use of online media solely for presentation purposes. In addition to differences in learning delivery pedagogical and learning objectives also vary between institutions and courses.

The Challenge Institutions vary nationally and internationally in their approaches to subject and language teaching. These differences need to be considered in the learning design for CLIL so that linguistic objectives can be properly met.

Implications General

o To succeed teaching materials and approaches need to be adapted to meet the understanding and capabilities of students from both a content and linguistic perspective.

Related Patterns PREPARE TO PROGRESS CULTURAL UNDERSTANDING EMBED IN INSTITUTION

19

Institutional Pattern 9: Embed in the institution Cross national working demands cross national understanding and synchronisation in terms of time and technology.

The Context Working across international boundaries and disciplines poses both practical and conceptual challenges. One of the greatest challenges for partner institutions was to timetable joint sessions that could be attended by all students and teachers and which fitted with the institutional curriculum.

Factoring in both content and language support made this even more complex and difficult.

Further issues were the need for technical support for such things as setting up virtual world systems and transmitting and capturing audio and image. The success of this support was heavily dependent upon institutional set-ups and support. Individuals within teams required different levels of support depending on the technology available to them and their level of expertise with that technology and the interfaces being used.

The motivation of students to take part in extra-curricular activities related to the project posed difficulties at some points in the project. However, in the distance learning setting volunteers were easily recruited. The difference between remotely located students and those in face-to-face institutions is attributed to a desire for contact with peers in a context where formal opportunities for meeting are limited.

Additionally, participating institutions need to have a shared understanding of CLIL for joint working to succeed. If understanding is not aligned prior to cross institutional learning design the result may be sub-optimal.

The Challenge In-house language teachers

In-house, CLIL teachers need to secure technical as well as other institutional support to recruit students for extra curricular activities in non standard teaching media.

Content teachers

Content teachers need to secure technical as well as other institutional support to recruit students for extra curricular activities in non standard teaching media.

Implications General

o It is important that all parties involved, including content teachers, have a shared understanding of CLIL to enable this approach to be successfully implemented.

20

o International collaboration in CLIL requires the planning and timetabling of joint sessions as part of the institutional curriculum. o Creating online pools of resources and using commonly accessible working environments such as Google Apps can assist in the development and use of resources by students and teachers from all institutions would greatly assist collaboration and joint working.

Related Patterns CULTURAL UNDERSTANDING TECHNOLOGY THAT WORKS

21

Pattern 10: Technology that works Online learning requires technical support both to set up and to run successfully.

The Context For each of the online learning experiences undertaken in ARCHI21 there was a need for technical support from the institutions involved. In the distance learning situation this report was provided remotely and the technical support staff used a mix of Skype, email and the affordances of the interface itself to diagnose and solve problems with individual students. In face-to-face settings technical support was needed in the participating institutions to install and run software and provide microphones and requisite hardware.

The Challenge Some platforms require technical support to get up and running and participation may be limited by problems with the interface itself for example difficulties in Second Life needed technical support to resolve. Other technical issues that may limit participation include access to microphones and webcams and internet connectivity issues.

Implications General

o Good learning design has to be matched with good technical support if learning objectives are to be achieved.

Related Patterns TECHNOLOGY THAT FITS EMBED IN INSTITUTION

22

Table 1: Pattern 2 Technology that fits: A summary of affordances, advantages and disadvantages Interface

Pedagogic affordance

Synchronous/ Asynchronous

Advantages

Disadvantages

Virtual Worlds

Collaborative building work

Synchronous

1. Playful environment that allows students to adopt new personas and play with their image.

1. Learning to operate and navigate in-world takes practice. Additionally, building work can be done with other established software lessening the motivation to learn a new interface.

e.g. Second Life, vAcademia, OpenSim

Collective experience and critiquing of 3D buildings

2. Environment that allows synchronous collaborative building work 3. Virtual worlds such as Second Life are full of objects and buildings created by others that can be repurposed for new projects but also toured and critically examined for educational purposes

Virtual world tours

4. In-world tools allow posting of presentations, videos and hyperlinks.

2. May pose technical challenges depending on hardware setup.

3. Only recordable from one viewpoint and requires screen-capture software for this.

4. The virtual world environment external to the pedagogic island is outside the control of teachers.

5. Use of in-world tools to set up environments and presentation boards requires knowledge and expertise.

6. Costly to maintain.

Virtual Conferencing e.g.

GoToMeeting, Blackboard, AdobeConnect

Presentation and discussion of ideas

Skype

Small group collaboration

Critiquing of presented work

File sharing

Synchronous with recording possible for asynchronous use

1. Interfaces generally require little practice to use.

2. Can be used at all stages of project development for sharing and critiquing of ideas.

1. Interfaces in which use of the microphone has to be passed between users, do not lend themselves to free conversation.

3. Used in real-world practice where distance is an issue.

2. Teaching sessions in this medium can become tutor-centric particularly if participants do not all know one another.

4. Can be combined with other tools such as SketchUp or Google Earth to provide real-time collaborative experiences.

3. Unless combined with other tools these media only allow working and presentation in 2D.

5. Can link out to websites and present video as well as images and presentations.

23

Online Presentation e.g. Knovio, Vimeo, SlideShare

Presentation of ideas

Asynchronous

1. Allows students to present their work online.

2. Knovio allows webcam video recording plus PowerPoint presentation.

1. One-way presentational tool, discussion has to take place in another medium e.g. email or one of the online conferencing interfaces.

3. Allows personal feedback direct to the student.

4. Gives the viewer control of their view of the presentation allowing it to be paused

Online Studio e.g. ODS, Flickr

Presentation of ideas, creations and research

Asynchronous

1. Allows students to develop an online portfolio of work and found objects as a discussion point with other students.

2. Allows dialogue around visual artefacts.

3. Online studio interface with video and audio capability allows oral interaction, rehersal and correction of language as well as textual communication.

4. Video upload capability allows students to make and remake presentations utilising target language.

5. Static images, video, audio and textual communication combined in one interface.

24

1. Asynchronous nature of interface means feedback is not immediate.

2. In some online studio interfaces, discussion may be artefact based rather than thematic.

References 1. Alexander, C. (1979). The timeless way of building. New York: Oxford University Press.

2. Alexander, C. (1977). A pattern language: Towns, buildings, and construction.

New York: Oxford University Press.

3. Avgeriou, P., Papasalouros, A., Retalis, S., & Skordalakis, M. (2003). Towards a pattern language for learning management systems. Educational Technology & Society, 6(2), 11-24.

4. Eckstein, J. (2000). Learning to teach and learning to learn: Running a course.

Retrieved July 30, 2009, from http://www.pedagogicalpatterns.org/examples/LearningAndTeaching.pdf 5. Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., & Vlissides, J. (1995). Design patterns: Elements of reusable object-oriented software. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

6. Lukosch, S., & Sch端mmer, T. (2006). Groupware development support with technology patterns. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(7), 599- 610.

7. Mahemoff, M. J., & Johnston, L. J. (1999). The planet pattern language for software internationalisation. In D. Manolescu & B. Wolf (Eds), Proceedings of the 6th Annual Conference on the Pattern Languages of Programs, Retrieved July 30, 2009, from http://hillside.net/plop/plop99/proceedings/paper_index.html

Appendix 1

Benchmark design patterns ARCHI21 Workpackage 8, Deliverable number 8.1 Prepared by Nicole Schadewitz, Georgy Holden, Katerina Alexiou and Theodore Zamenopoulos

Introduction This report outlines outcomes from observations and analysis of student activity and performance at the three distance learning compulsory design courses of the BA/BSc in Design and Innovation at the Open University.

Between them the three courses teach around 2000 students each year, who are predominantly English speakers. The core objective of the report is to set a benchmark of good practices to guide successful language learning in the context of design studio teaching.

The proposed benchmark of good practices takes the form of design patterns. A design pattern is a structured way to describe good practices within a specific domain of expertise. Patterns can be derived from qualitative or quantitative analysis of case studies but they may be also derived from experience and then backed by theory. A design pattern describes a recurring problem, the context in which it occurs, and a possible method of solution. The original idea of design patterns can be found in the work of the architect Christopher Alexander (Alexander, 1977). Design patterns are the core element of a well-formed language that people use in order to address complex problems. It has long been known that design patterns can offer a valuable format for the identification and communication of knowledge of successful design solutions for recurring problems (Alexander, 1979). Following developments in architecture, a diverse range of design pattern collections has been developed, including patterns for computer-supported, collaborative working (CSCW, Lukosch & Schümmer, 2006) and pedagogy (Baggetun, Rusman, & Poggi, 2004).

This report proposes 12 patterns characteristic of distance design learning and outlines implications for CLIL. 

The slow road to illumination



Do as I do



No teller without listener



Touch points



Breathing



Wear your skills



Know me better



Lurking design crit



Learn to practice, practice to learn



Local community meeting



Annotated artefacts



Stories of a special teacher

27

Pattern 1: The slow road to illumination Summary Definitions and concepts around design develop slowly through conversations with others.

Problem In design studio education, there seems to be a constant quest for finding the answer to the question ‘what is design’ or what is the meaning of my doing. After many years a student is still finding difficulty in understanding what design is at its core. The students cannot build a concept of ‘design’.

Forces What design actually is, is hard to pin down, it can be many things for many people. Students may be very good at the ‘making’ but the thinking part is difficult. There seems to be a difficulty in not knowing the goal or essence of design and designing and related concepts. Design students learn tacitly, and gain intuition rather than codified knowledge in form of concepts and definitions.

Context This pattern can be used throughout design education.

Solution The student needs to slowly develop a feel for what design is and related design concepts. During a ‘try, fail, learn, repeat’ cycle, the student will eventually be able to express a concept of design. This is based on an on-going dialogue with the tutor and others, but no instant illumination should be expected. The tutor and others may not have a ready-made answer. There might not be one answer. The student needs to find for him or herself the answer. Others can only be there to listen actively and ask good questions.

Examples In The Open University Design Thinking Course (U101) OU VLE forums, the topic of what is design thinking reoccurs throughout the 9 months of the module in different disguises. Although at points students think they might have a good working definition and understanding of it, the more they discuss and the more they study the course this understanding shifts. Also, students don’t develop one definition of ‘design thinking’, they have their own. On the third level module (T307) students engage in project work that gradually develops their understanding of designing and the design process. Discussions in forums and face-to-face meetings show gradual recognition of the complexity of designing and gradual acquisition of designerly ways of communicating.

28

Implications for CLIL In order to develop an abstract concept about design, and in fact any other design related concept, students need to be animated to think aloud and arrive at their own definitions based on their developing understanding. They might not reach a definition immediately, but on-going conversation and active listening will help the students to continue exploring the concept. The development of listening skills and the ability to question (both in tutors and students) are essential for design and language education. This also relates to Schon’s theory of reflection in action.

Related Patterns Learn to practice, practice to learn

29

Pattern 2: Do as I do Summary Students learn how to relate to one another and they are acculturated into an online community and learning environment through the example of the moderator or facilitator.

Problem Participants are not always clear how they should relate to and engage with one another in an online learning situation.

Forces Sometimes participants bring behaviours into an online learning situation from other contexts that may not be appropriate. This might include their use of language within a discussion or ways of working in a team. This can lead to the development of a prevailing communication style that may be unhelpful or even damaging to the learning experience. In a worst case scenario the moderator may also bring negative experiences or expectations into the learning situation and further constrain the educational objectives Context The context in which this pattern can be applied includes Social Networking Sites, online discussion forums, Second Life and VLEs (Virtual Learning Environments) where participants share the same learning objectives but have a range of educational, social or cultural backgrounds and different experiences of online engagement. This pattern works particularly well in less structured learning situations where wicked or complex problems are discussed.

Solution The moderator or facilitator of the learning space sets an example of appropriate and helpful engagement – not only in the early stages of the use of the learning space but also in situations where new learning goals are formulated or new tasks and ways of working and communicating are approached. In this way, the moderator stimulates new learning interactions by setting tasks that challenge the students, for example, by giving the first response to a provocative and complex design task. Here, the moderator offers a concrete example, of the way in which the task might be tackled.

In an online discussion, the facilitator might devise and ask a challenging question, to which partial but concrete advice is added either within the message or as response. This acts as a model answer for students to come up with other possible responses.

If the focus of participation extends to visual communication the facilitator would post and annotate an image, which then acts as anchor and model for further

30

discussion. In annotating images, the facilitator would adopt a positive and encouraging tone and never belittle participant contributions.

Examples In The Open University Design Thinking Course (U101), a learning component provides examples of how to comments on other peoples’ work. Tutors also give examples of good practice in reflective writing when they mark students scripts, so students can pick it up in the next assignment. In The Open University Design Thinking Course (U101) forums, an initial post often sets the tone for the entire thread. On T307, welcome messages set expectations in a friendly way and show students how graphic communication can form part of their dialogue. Example setting extends into the online tutorial environment (Elluminate), where students are encouraged to follow the facilitators’ lead in playful use of online tools to enhance their experience and assure appropriate levels of engagement with peers.

Implications for CLIL Design tutor or teacher sets an example of language use in a specific task. For example, in WP4 Nicole and Patrick worked together to introduce the format of design presentations: Nicole highlighted the main points from a design perspective and Patrick gave concrete language examples based on the work students have done the day before, i.e. you could say “and in conclusion we found that this brief was very broad and therefore hard to address in a short time …”.

Related Patterns No teller without listener

31

Pattern 3: No teller without listener Summary A storyteller needs listeners to legitimate the relevance of the story through their attention, non-verbal feedback or small agreements. Similarly in an online discussion, students that ‘listen’ need to legitimate the value of contributions to the community or group through some form of feedback (agreement, examples, or some form of contextualisation of the content). Positive feedback gives the person posting authority in the group and confidence to continue posting.

Problem A vibrant and stimulating discussion among students can sometimes be difficult to maintain in collaborative online learning. Contributions might be relevant but too few, or on the contrary, contributions may be manifold but irrelevant to the community or topic of discussion. Discussions might die out due to low numbers of contributions or due to lack of quality contents in contributions.

Forces In online discussions, a high number of contributions do not lead to sustained discussion. Students quickly lose interest in participating in the discussion if contributions are irrelevant and off-topic. However, a discussion that only contains content-specific detailed contributions might be slow evolving due to the time it takes to formulate such a high quality contribution.

Some students lead discussions either due to their interest or expertise in the topic. Others might value and learn from these contributions but only tend to ‘listen’ or ‘read’ because it is not their expertise.

Even if the ‘listeners’ gave some form of response they would often be perceived as passive learners and only the one who contribute their expertise are perceived active learners.

Context The problem can occur in asynchronous discussion fora or social networking sites, and also in synchronous online meetings within a learning group or community. The discussions are learning goal orientated, i.e. completing a learning task, or discussing course readings. A tutor might facilitate these discussions, but discussions in self-directed learning also show this problem.

Students in distance higher education often have diverse professional or social backgrounds. Using this pattern offers students opportunity to contribute expert knowledge and also contextualise contributions within their own domain.

Solution Online discussions need to strike a balance between topic-specific, detailed contributions and a number of responses that contextualise the contents of this contribution. The Contextual responses may state examples, questions or simple 32

agreement. This confirms the value and usefulness of the original detailed contribution and also encourages others to make similar contributions.

The tellers need listeners to legitimate their ‘stories’. Both roles are equally important to sustain a discussion. The teller’s quality contribution might stem from a certain expertise, experience or knowledge background that others don’t have. It is oriented towards achieving the shared learning goal, i.e. how something can be done, how a theory can be understood, etc. However, the listeners are not quiet. They response by giving examples of how this content was or might be applied, they might ask clarifying questions or simply acknowledge the usefulness of the content by stating how it helped them seeing something that they did not see before.

This quality-quantity, content-context balance not only gives the student who posted a quality, content-specific message confidence in repeating this but it also gives a good example for others to contribute quality posts when their expertise or experience allows.

The mechanism behind this dualism is authority. Authority has to be earned by legitimating the experience or expertise on a topic that contributes to the learning goal of the group or community. Tellers and listeners co-construct authority in this way.

If a tutor facilitates a discussion the tutor often is perceived as authoritative figure. The tutor wants to use this pattern there should be 2 discussion facilitators that take on the roles of teller and listener giving a good example for the students to follow. After giving the example, the facilitators could ask to share specific knowledge, experience or expertise and contextualise this contribution, again for other students to follow the example.

Examples In The Open University Design Thinking Course (U101), T211 and T307 forums, each year we have about 5 out of around 400 students who are very engaging, knowledgeable and frequent posters, others respect posts from these students and reply to these posts with encouragements and examples of how they could apply the content of their posts, like “very interesting point, it helped me ...”.

Implications for CLIL Some students might be naturally quicker in picking up a language or understanding certain terms and concepts in another language. These students should be encouraged have the confidence to share their understanding. The student should not only state that he or she has understood but also involve others by describing ‘why’ and asking fellow students for confirmation using examples or alternative understandings. If the student’s contribution is relevant to others he or she will receive a reaction.

Related Patterns Do as I do

33

Pattern 4: Touch points Summary Students in distant design education are often working alone, they are geographically distributed, and have diverse cultural and educational backgrounds. One of the reoccurring challenges in this context is how to enable students to develop a ‘social self-awareness’: awareness of how others (students and tutors) perceive, react or share one’s own visions, actions and understanding.

This pattern proposes a game where a distributed community of students creates a common environment or artefact.

Problem ‘Lonely learners’ in design education, that is students that develop their design skills and knowledge individually and predominantly in reflection to their own action, often lack an appreciation of the importance of the context within a design problem occurs. So, one of the reoccurring challenges of distance design education is enabling students to develop a ‘social self-awareness’: awareness of how others (students and tutors) perceive, react or share one’s own visions, actions and understanding. This challenge refers to the need to develop a tacit knowledge of how individual beliefs, values and creations may be perceived by a social group of peers and tutors.

Forces Lonely learners in distant design education are geographically distributed.

Students often study course materials individually at home. These materials may contain activities that require the production of artefacts. However, if artefacts are not contextualized within a professional or learning domain, the design study materials may be less effective. Students’ lack of learning experience about the social implications of their activity can lead to conflicts or inconsistencies between the actual effects of their actions and their intentions or beliefs about their social environment (‘cognitive dissonance’).

Context This pattern is applicable in situations where students are working alone on a task, they are geographically distributed, and have diverse social, cultural and educational backgrounds. This is a typical situation in distant design education.

However, this pattern may also be used beyond distant design education. Any learning environment that seeks to establish a community of learners and a community of practice may make use of this pattern.

Solution Create a ‘game’-like environment. More specifically, allow the creation of a situation where a distributed community of students creates a common environment or artefact (i.e. a social artefact). An example is a virtual game where each player needs to envisage a city and propose the location and 34

development of different types of buildings by taking turns. So, each student can propose partial changes to this ‘social artefact’ (e.g. city) and then observe reactions from other students and tutors. These ‘social artefacts’ act as ‘touch points’ between students and tutors and can be used as instruments in order to create a social-self awareness.

Examples Students of the 2nd level design course at the Open University were asked to join a Facebook (FB) group dedicated to the course learning objectives. Their core assignment was the design of a chair and students were encouraged to share sketches or pictures of their models. These images uploaded to the picture gallery helped start discussions around ideas and processes in designing. The pictures played the role of ‘touch points’.

Implications for CLIL ‘Touch points’ are the seeds for effective language learning. Their core function from a language learning perspective is to provide a concrete reference point for developing a certain discussion. More specifically, touch points are physical (e.g. models) or visual entities (e.g. pictures or sketches) that provide semantics (meaning) to abstract words or sentences. The development of such social artefacts is therefore the driving force for building a vocabulary but more importantly for structuring sentences that capture the meaning of a certain situation.

Related Pattern Know me better

35

Pattern 5: Breathing Summary In collaborative designing, efficient communication and ideation is achieved in a mix of small team work and large group meetings.

Problem Design team communication in large teams i.e. 6 and above can get messy and uncoordinated.

Forces Design team members speak over each other, or in parallel to one another or some might not speak up at all, because they don’t see the point not being heard.

The team discussion could potentially also be too regulated by enforcing a strict speaking order, which limits the ideation process which is usually quick and freeflowing.

Context The pattern can be used in a wide variety of design team collaboration situations, such as brainstorming, ideation or when a specific task has to be accomplished, i.e. building objects etc.

Solution Allow the design team to split up in smaller groups (2-4) to diverge design thinking and ideation in different directions. After a while, the team gathers together to discuss similarities in the idea exploration to converge the ideas to a few good one that repeat and seem to resonate with the team.

Examples In The Open University Design Thinking Course (U101) , intensive group work is carried out in smaller teams for a limited amount of time. In the OU WP4 large groups were split up in smaller working teams to facilitate synchronous discussion in SL Implications for CLIL Vary group sizes so they are appropriate to specific language and design learning needs.

36

Pattern 6: Wear your skills Summary Your visual appearance reflects on your abilities.

Problem Potential collaborators need to know about each others’ skills and abilities to consider collaborating on a task or to complete a certain task. The aim of this pattern is base lining skills among potential partners before a task is approached together.

Forces Potential collaborators might not know each other except from what they can see or read in the online environment. However, when they consider collaborating to improve efficiency in achieving a shared task or goal, how do they know what another person is able to contribute? Collaborators might have difficulty in establishing the veracity of the skills advertised by another user when only using words. Unless it is a writing skill that is being sought for this task or goal, users need to find a way to validate the skills that they and others bring into the collaborative setting. The form of representation needs to agree with the skills and abilities that need to be represented.

Context This pattern can be used in visual virtual worlds and in virtual collaborative environments that allow a visual or multi-modal representation of the user. This also includes community environments or social network sites that offer customization of home pages for individual users or user groups. Depending on the need to represent a certain skill, such as writing or speaking, the pattern can also be applied to other collaborative environments, such as wikis for writing and sound fora for representing a speaking skill.

Potential collaborators in this context are non-anonymous users. This means, they need to be able and willing to show a part of them (as in skills and abilities), that forms part of their online identity in this context.

Solution Users represent their abilities using the affordances of the medium. The representation shows indirectly proficiency in skills that might be required to achieve a certain task. The visual representation of an avatar in 2D or 3D shows the extent of the owner's visualisation skills and abilities to use tools in this particular environment. A skilful and original textual representation of your personality indicates the extent of the user's writing skills. The representation of each skill needs to fit the requirements that are sought by others to collaboratively solve a task or reach a goal.

Within a virtual game environment, the users’ skills might be gained or given, and be personal skills or avatar skill. The avatar might collect skills and show them as

37

tools or the avatar might be designed or dressed in a way that shows a degree of skill in this environment.

Within social network sites, various visual representations of the user might indicate the proficiency of skills or wealth of experiences, such as pictures, links and written pieces. This also allows drawing conclusions regarding the suitability of this user for a task.

Examples In The Open University Design Thinking Course (U101), ODS profiles show the student’s design and visualisation skills and abilities. In SL, the more experiences uses can be easily recognised by the advanced outfit and versatility in using the tool.

Implications for CLIL Visual representation and textual representation could not only be used a s a baseline at the beginning of collaboration but should be continuously updated to reflect the on-going design and language learning process. This could be a repeated activity to chart progress. It could take a game-like character to steer a bit of friendly competition. Excellent progress in representation could be rewarded.

38

Pattern 7: Know me better Problem At the beginning of collaboration, learners are neither familiar with each other nor know much about the learning task or technology they are going to use.

Successfully starting a distributed collaborative project or learning task is not an easy mission. You want to set the right ‘tone’ and raise appropriate expectations from the students regarding the learning task. You also want students to become familiar with each other quickly. In short, you need to prepare the students for multiple factors that might influence the collaboration.

Forces There are time constraints to design learning modules or courses. To introduce new technology, new co-student and staff and a new subject separately would take too long and students might lose interest in learning them separately.

Students are not familiar with each other nor the environment or the task.

Context This solution is particularly successful when new students meet each other in online learning environments. In this context collaborators are likely to not know each other well. This might occur in distance learning environments with many students in one course or where students are new to online learning and collaboration. This includes asynchronous and synchronous communication, such as social network sites, online fora or communities and also video conferencing or meeting environments.

Solution Start with an activity that uses the new technology you want to introduce to students to share several quick outputs with another. These outputs could be visual, photos of objects, diagrams, drawings or written / spoken. The sheer accumulation of these outputs shows the students personality from different perspectives. It introduces the technologies, project scope and ways of working playfully and generates a lot of online activity, which is essential to keep the online design communication going.

The activities should encourage students to upload visual material to an online space or in world. The upload of a variety of visual material allows for quick comparison among students and indirectly facilitates comments on the visual material. This engages students with the technology, the idea and power of variations in designing and with each other.

A collaborative design research task that connects the exploration of the collaborator’s background and personality with the project brief, initiates collaboration and prepares for the challenges of coordinating distributed design learning.

39

Examples In The Open University Design Thinking Course (U101), ODS technology is introduced to students based on a number of quick activities, like uploading scribbles, pictures or links etc., that get students familiar with the technology, the scope of the course and each other very quickly. Small and quick exercises also generate a large number of uploads, which is important in getting online interaction started and sustained.

Implications for CLIL A variety of uploaded visual material (self-produced) gives students a broader and more personal base for discussion and language learning. Induction courses could also playfully link the introduction to SL technology with language games and some small and quick design tasks to get the students going.

Related Pattern Touch Points

40

Pattern 8: Lurking design crit Summary Allow all students to ‘listen into’ design crit that were hold and recorded between one tutor and one student.

Problem A tutor-student design crit cannot be easily overheard by others when design learning happens at a distance.

Forces Design crit are usually very personal and happen between one student and a tutor. However, often other students simply overhear a conversation if it is hold in an open plan studio. Asynchronous design crit conversations might not be visible / audible to all peers, i.e. when they are send via email. In synchronous learning situations design crit feedback is easier to overhear but students might not memorise what has been said and how.

Context This is applicable in asynchronous communication in distance education where feedback is given to one student by one tutor in writing or speaking.

Solution Feedback is given to one based on an uploaded design or an object build in-world.

The artefact is accessible to all peers. The design crit is centred around this artefact. Textual / written crits are captured in conjunction with the uploaded artefact. Recordings are made of synchronous crits. Other students that listen in or read the feedback learn indirectly by lurking. Lurking might also encourage the lurker to upload their own work to receive feedback.

Examples In The Open University Design Thinking Course (U101), forums and ODS are often used by students to ask for explicit advice of a more experienced design student or tutor. A personal crit is given, but the content of this crit is visible to all others. Others often state that reading the crit was very helpful for them too. On T307 face to face sessions are used for critiquing student projects in a way that enables general points to be made that can assist the entire group.

Implications for CLIL Make design communication or personal crits accessible for all to learn language use in design indirectly from others.

41

Pattern 9: Learn to practice, practice to learn Summary Develop theoretical and practical understanding in parallel. Set project work with clear stages that requires the application of theoretical knowledge to practical situations. Ask students to reflect on the ways in which they have married these two elements of their learning Problem How to help design students acquire both the theoretical and practical knowledge that they need in their future careers?

Forces Students need to learn theoretical and conceptual underpinnings of design and also practical implementation and skills development. Some design students are biased towards practical learning and find theoretical work difficult to understand. For theoretical learning to take place an openness is required, but this is not always present. Some students focus all their energy into their practical work and do not ground it in theory. Other students may be much more comfortable to establish theoretical notations of their design thinking but have difficulty proving them in practice.

Context This pattern can be use in individual or team learning in distance design education where learning is structured around stages of activities.

Solution Develop theoretical and practical understanding in parallel. Set project work and activities with clear stages requiring the application of theoretical knowledge to practical situations. Ideally set a practical exercise first, then introduce a related theoretical concept. Then ask students to discuss the practical exercises in the light of this theoretical frame. This guides students’ discussions about the practical exercise and deepens the understanding of theoretical concepts. Ask students to reflect on the ways in which they have married these two elements of their learning.

Examples In The Open University Design Thinking Course (U101) marked assignments, students are asked to reflect on design activities they have been doing drawing on the concepts they have been introduced to in the reading materials. In T307 a design project runs throughout the teaching year requiring students to apply their developing theoretical understanding in a practical context.

42

Implications for CLIL Such parallel practical and theoretical activities could be interesting for design and language learning to develop an understanding of concepts of design in another language. But it might also be helpful in developing conversational skills.

Related Patterns The slow road to illumination

43

Pattern 10: Local community meeting Summary Frequent local community meetings support students and facilitators in understanding online behaviour of remote teammates in international distance learning.

Problem Particularly in international collaborative projects in distance learning, the online facilitator might be from another University than the students in the learning team. The facilitator might have never had face-to-face contact with these students. Hence, the facilitator might have less chance to fully understand the local circumstances that act on a student's participation in teamwork, such as personal situations, cultural presumptions, etc. An online facilitator might not know the reasons why students fail contributing to distributed teamwork. In addition, students from other universities might not trust online facilitators as much as their local tutors from their own university[CK1] . This lack of knowledge and trust can have devastating effects on the teamwork process.

Students become dissatisfied with the team and drop out of the project.

Forces International facilitators only sees the online behaviour of their remote students, such as missing contributions to team work. However, they might not be able to identify the underlying reasons for this behaviour, such as illness, problems in communication or expectation, cultural misunderstandings, etc. Real reasons for online behaviour might be disguised.

International facilitators might only have one or a few student in their team, which is from their own university. However, other students from their university are distributed in other teams.

Students are more likely to trust their local tutor based on a shared culture, shared profession, and shared local language than the online facilitator, who might have a different background. This creates barriers to free and honest communication of potential problems in teamwork Context Whenever students get mixed up in interdisciplinary and inter-university teams, this pattern can be applied. The pattern particularly applies to international collaborative e-learning projects between students from different universities. At least one student per university is in a team. Hence each team consists of students from all participating universities. A tutor, which is usually an academic from one of the participating universities, is assigned to facilitate the international team. So this tutor only has one student in a team with which they have been or can come in contact locally due to their shared university association. All other students can only be contacted online.

44

Solution Each tutor initiates frequent but voluntary local meetings with all students who participate in this international e-learning course. Although these students might not be in their team, they share a cultural background, which allows them to communicate informally and openly about the collaboration process in their international teams. Potential problems in online collaboration can be discussed among local peers and with the local tutor who also has the experience of collaborating online, as they are also online facilitators. On one hand, the students have a community support through exchanging experiences with their local peers. On the other hand, local tutors can learn about successful strategies other teams and tutors applied in collaboration.

Both, student and tutor learn how other groups collaborate. This can address both technical and social matters. Moreover, the local tutor might be able to resolve local situational constraints that limit local students in contributing to online collaboration. The local tutor might also much better understand the reasons for the student's online behaviour if these are based on cultural differences.

The solution can be implemented by advising local tutors who are also online facilitators to offer voluntary local meetings to student from their university who take part in this international project. The frequency of the meetings depends on the length and requirements of the project. This should be in the power of decision of the local tutor but can be negotiated among all facilitators to allow a fair treatment of all participants.

Examples In a European project on self-directed learning, students from 3 different countries were asked to collaborate in small mixed teams. A tutor from Croatia reported that: “I met my Croatian students few times during the semester (3 or 4 times). Discussions were mainly about their status in the group, obligations, problems and opinions. The main goal of this meetings was to motivate them and to try to solve some problems if necessary.”

In the same project, a tutor from Finland reported about local voluntary, informal meetings. The tutor advertised the meetings to the local students offering a platform for discussion with the teacher or with their group mates. There were about 4-9 students present from all groups each time. Mostly they advised each other in some specific issues like how to start getting RSS from other group mate’s blogs etc. Each time they met and dealt with very practical issues and discussed how certain challenges in the course could be solved. This tutor tried to say very little and let the students solve the challenges themselves.

Another tutor from Tallinn University reported in week 4 of the project: “This week I learned that if students disappear, the only thing that works is not distant prompts by mail, but local people can help you out. We seem to be all needing some support, sympathy and understanding from real humans when we get stuck. […] The main question is how to reach these group members who are not

45

active. Local facilitators and local peer help was helpful to figure out why people are missing� This supports the approach suggested in this pattern using a local community to understand reasons for online behaviour.

Implications for CLIL Although this pattern did not originate from the OU context, it could be particularly helpful in WP5/WP6 where students collaborate in international teams. Communication is sometimes easier with a person one is more familiar with. Problems in collaboration or language learning and use could be discussed easier with a local contact person than within an international team and a stranger. It could also be that each group gets one teacher assigned with whom they develop a closer relationship.

46

Pattern 11: Annotated artefacts Problem In large learning groups a large volume of visual material is accumulated quickly.

With such a large amount of uploads, how do you facilitate that an upload receives comments?

Forces In fast image skimming, pictures that have a strong visual impact get most attention. However, attention does not guarantee that a discussion evolves around it. When others pause and look at an image longer they need additional triggers to provide written or spoken feedback.

Context This pattern can be used in image centred online communication or in virtual worlds.

Solution Ask students to annotate the visual material they upload or to provide descriptions for objects they build in virtual worlds. Due to this meta information, if phrased as question or interesting comment, an upload or object is more likely to receive replies from others. This might not guarantee feedback but facilitate it significantly.

Examples In The Open University Design Thinking Course (U101), uploads to ODS that have no textual description are nearly always ignored and not commented on. But if the students explicitly annotate the artefact asking for feedback, the student would normally receive feedback.

Implications for CLIL Annotating and describing visual material is very good practice to receive feedback on a design and also practice language. The text is contextualised around an image and hence easier to comprehend. Students can also try out humour to attract comments, which is usually the most difficult part in learning a language.

Related Patterns Touch Points

47

Pattern 12: Stories of a special teacher Summary Aha experiences or strong learning experiences often arise by being close to charismatic and talented senior designers who are also good teachers by telling tales and stories about their practice and exposing students to real-world designs they have done.

Problem Students often don’t know what is relevant to learn or what they will really need when they eventually go into design practice.

Forces Charismatic teachers often have typical repetitive behaviour, i.e. use of typical design-related words, for which they become famous. Charismatic teachers love telling stories, often over and over again. Students like to listen to real world stories and like to see real world examples.

Context The pattern can be used in any design learning context where tutors with practical experiences are called into teaching, but it works particularly well if tutors have an active link to practice during teaching.

Solution Encourage tutors that are active practitioners to share stories of their experiences as designers. These stories can even be repeated at different points during the course for students to gain a stronger learning impact. Tutors emphases their own core design principles and learning over and over again by telling stories from the real world.

Examples On the Open University design modules, there are some very good, funny and charismatic tutors that post real world design stories to the forums and give students a great first hand experience of projects and authentic problems, solutions and also vocabulary in design.

Implications for CLIL If a tutor or teacher uses some words or phrases again and again wrapped in stories and examples, students will learn them quicker and make a strong learning connection.

48

Appendix 2

Interviews with ARCHI21 partners: Coded extracts THEME

CHALLENGE

SOLUTION

Multidisciplinary issues for CLIL

Language development seen as interruption to design thinking process

Interviewee A: An intensive with voluntary participants lasting one week.

UBP were the language experts. They took a normal approach to language/content integration. At the beginning of the studio that was seen as interesting and fun but as their reflective design progressed this was seen as interruption to thinking process.

Teachers (BK and French architect), had problems with the language work because they were product focused.

Multidisciplinary issues for CLIL

Content teacher protect their disciplinary boundaries

Interviewee A: Content teachers are less likely to give up disciplinary boundaries.

Content teachers found it hard to hand over their resources to linguistics, students commented that the content teachers did not align with language goals. This has been re-enforced by experience of the project. Content teachers do not want to show their weaknesses.

Multidisciplinary issues for CLIL

Teaching is discipline specific

Interviewee B a. We need language teachers to work together with content teachers to device curriculum b. In the ARCHI project we have created resources (Leaning Objects). New module can be use these resources or use them as inspiration for new course production.

EVIDENCES

Interviewee B: Teaching is often discipline specific based on a specific curriculum.

Language development appears as add on.

COMMENTS

Multidisciplinary issues for CLIL

The culture of architectural education

Interviewee C: The culture of architecture is such the module of cybergogy can not be readily embraced. But there are other disciplines that the module works.

Science/business seems to have successful examples.

Multidisciplinary issues for CLIL

Communication issues between content teachers and language teachers --- Content Teachers felt frustrated and external language mediators felt lost

Interviewee D: The lack of integration between the design activities and language teachers could have been overcome by discussions between the tutors and teachers in advance to plan sessions jointly. The Learning teachers were only available to work at certain times and needed to know be able to anticipate their involvement.

Multidisciplinary issues for CLIL

Design teaching is visual and linguistic

Interviewees C, D, E: Architectural students as teachers would have had greater understanding.

50

Interviewees C, D, E: Met with John, with no visual support, students realised the need for precision and consistent use of terms.

Presentation was arranged as a staff meeting and students had to explain their ideas without using visual. Introducing language mediation at the intermediate stage not successful. English as first language users tend to be less sensitive.

Multidisciplinary issues for CLIL

Interviewees C, D, E: One week of language learning at the beginning of Erasmus course.

Vocabulary Slovene, English, French listening exercises but then they were forced to focus on a language more than they were used to.

Students more attentive to language.

In future will put the emphasis on language and have greater discussion about language and the reasoning.

Use of online tools?? Students would rather use SketchUp than use SL, no point to use a tool if it is difficult. Go-to-meeting worked well for presentation. Knovio was also good but students not confident with presentation.

Multidisciplinary issues for CLIL

No clear role for language teachers

Interviewees C, D, E: In house teachers who know the context are more helpful.

51

Interviewees C, D, E: Communication in design is linguistic and visual / general and specific / universal but also culturally depended What was the main problem addressed?

Communication is critical, the point is that English is not enough, in architecture visual language is of equal importance.

Would like to explore the double layer of language, the general and specific. This is being dealt with through the learning objects. Different understanding of the same terms in different languages because of changing cultural contexts. It helps if the melody of the terms that tells the cultural background - the dependency between linguistic and design skills: Does development of language affect development of design skills? Raising awareness of language will raise ability to be sensitive. Respect of culture and background. Using cultural difference.

Interviewees C, D, E: The language teachers took different roles, in English mediation they helped students with presentations, with textual explanations UL worked, orally with the UK LMs. For Slovenian, help was needed to get teachers to work on detail, e.g. structure and presentation tips. Discussed with LMs that materials are needed in advance, but, when students are experimenting it is impossible to do this and flexible approach needed. Difference between UBP teachers and SO teachers.

Interviewees C, D, E: Skype and email and also go-to-meeting between students and language teachers.

One to one and group meetings. Some group meetings and then an email to individuals.

Most helpful was the in-house mediation.

Multidisciplinary issues for CLIL

Interviewee F: Language mediation, there was one for WP4 but not clear how the contribution was made. CLIL moment was when the interface was in French and class in English. Some feedback was provided from the teachers but more focused on technical issues.

With UBL students there was an LM in the classes but they took more of an observer role. Teacher took the role of questioning understanding. This may be due to the student's level of expertise

Multidisciplinary issues for CLIL

Interviewee D: The lack of integration between the design activities and language teachers could have been overcome by discussions between the tutors and teachers in advance to plan sessions jointly. The Learning teachers were only available to work at certain times and needed to know be able to anticipate their involvement.

By their nature virtual worlds are synchronous, this means that planning is imperative. LMs had been trained to go into VW. There were 15 novice computer users, however, subsequent to their training some are still active in world. The discovery decks, learning experiences and cybergogy area were well used and the cybergogy theory was exploited.

52

Interviewee D: Overall the experience was a negative one for a number of reasons.

There was a mismatch between the availability of the students based in Central Europe and the external language mediators. The expectation of support was there but there was no discipline briefing for LMs so they had to go into situations cold and this resulted in them standing and watching what was going on rather than playing a more active role in language development.

In WP5 the LMs were available but the opportunity of using them was not taken up. They were invited to be in-world at very short notice. Ideally they should have been working with students at least two weeks before presentations, this led to frustrations amongst the LMs.

Multidisciplinary issues for CLIL

Bringing language and design education together

Interviewee F: We need to modify and revise existing teaching materials to fit the level of the students and their linguistic capabilities

Multidisciplinary issues for CLIL

Implementation issues for CLIL

Interviewee F: How to bring together design and language? We need to modify and revise existing teaching materials to fit the level of the students and their linguistic capabilities.

Interviewee F: Language mediation for WP4 it was not clear how the contribution was made. CLIL moment was when the interface was in French and class in English. Some feedback was provided by teachers focused on technical issues.

With UL students there was an LM in the classes but they took more of an observer role. Teacher took the role of questioning understanding. This may be due to the student's level of expertise.

Interviewee A: For WP5 UBP had left the project because of differences between them and PM.BK felt fragile because his content was not being respected. Lots of different motivations for being part of the institution.

Different motivations

53

Implementation issues for CLIL

Implementation issues for CLIL

Difficulties of institutions working together due to: Time:

Interviewee A: Failure points to the difficulties of institutions working together with extra curricular activities and timings.Time:

Support:

Support:

Institutional support:

Institutional support:

Individual support:

Individual support:

TechnologyMotivation

TechnologyMotivation

Institutional adoption of technologies

Interviewee A: Institutional adoption of technologies is key to the use of them.

Time limitations and the affect on objectives are important constraints.

54

Interviewee A: WP5 was a disaster because UBP were supposed to work with PM with SM No content so MH just did what they would normally do in terms of communicating their architectural projects. Lot of discussion but nothing was realised between the two institutions.

Knovio presentations are the result of last minute organisation to provide outcomes of the student's work.

Presentation in SL was suggested and four students turned up to present there. (MH provided resources to support).

Implementation issues for CLIL

Lack of collaboration

Interviewee D: The problem for implementing the CLIL approach was not the international/European element of the project, different the time zone or technology. In general the problem was the lack of collaboration.

Implementation issues for CLIL

Mismatch between the availability of the students and language teachers

Interviewee D: Overall the experience was a negative one for a number of reasons.

There was a mismatch between the availability of the students based in Central Europe and the external language mediators. The expectation of support was there but there was no discipline briefing for LMs so they had to go into situations cold and this resulted in them standing and watching what was going on rather than playing a more active role in language development.

Implementation issues for CLIL

Organisational issues

Interviewee D: Things that would have helped to improve the experience are: • Students and LMs could have worked together on Google docs.

• All Learning objects could have been used on a commonly accessible website.

• There could have been in world interaction.

• Better planning, administration and briefing

Interviewee D: The biggest challenges were the organisational issues. Things that would have helped to improve the experience are: • Students and LMs could have worked together on Google docs.

• All Learning objects could have been used on a commonly accessible website.

• There could have been in world interaction.

• Better planning, administration and briefing The learning objects on their own are flat but supported by communication between LMs and students could have been more

55

useful.

Implementation issues for CLIL

No consensus about CLIL

Interviewee D: An all party discussion about definitions was needed.

Interviewee D: An all party discussion about definitions was needed. There was also no consensus about CLIL. SO have worked with a CLIL specialist in Kazakstan and know that this approach can work well. However, the problems of this particular project led to a lack of engagement and enthusiasm this meant that its full potential was not realised.

Implementation issues for CLIL

Curriculum issues?

Interviewee F: We need to modify and revise existing teaching materials to fit the level of the students and their linguistic capabilities

Interviewee F: How to bring together design and language? We need to modify and revise existing teaching materials to fit the level of the students and their linguistic capabilities.

Implementation issues for CLIL

The culture of architectural education

Interviewee C: The culture of architecture is such the module of cybergogy can not be readily embraced. There are other disciplines where the module works.

Science/business have successful examples.

56

Technological issues

Choosing a communication platform

Interviewee F: Talking about WP? Choosing a platform was quite difficult. Decided not to use SL or vAcademia. MH wanted to use Skype and another interface but there were problems with the communication because it was not natural.Adobe Connect chosen because SC had experience of use. Used with university video conferencing system.

Worked well, however uploading files meant conversion to PPT. But provided tools needed and could use the AC tools, which worked well together. Remote communication was not perfect, there was a little bit of lag and also students needed to come to microphone.

Technological issues

Technological issues

Interviewee F: Linguistically felt about the same as if SC had been in the classroom, body language lost. Pauses between interchanges because of lag. Occasional clarification needed. Worked with language specialist with the students assisting with any linguistic issues and also prompting interaction.

Prompting online interaction + Responding to online queries is hard

Interviewee F: Prompting interaction remotely a challenge. Hard for tutor to understand the challenges of working in other language. Partly non-visual clues, and also comments having to be intentioned.

When comments came in a flood hard to respond to everyone. Becomes tutor centric.

Text chat chaotic and difficult to manage.

Was conducted in the target language.

57

Technological issues

Interviewees C, D, E: Simple platform helped in the process of the engagement but it depends on the content. No point using in-world solution for real-world situation. Appropriate context for the work done. Dependent on literacy, what needs to be done. SL good for playful engagement, but difficulties in transferring ideas. Used the SL Square and also the lighting workshop and students were involved. SL used to build.

UL used the international set of peers to raise awareness of language and focused on this by introduction of teachers. Building course in SL had its own language demands because challenging even in own language.

Students involved on some courses were volunteers but on others they on course. No compulsory subjects involved.

Technological issues

Interviewee F: In SL the structure is less clear, so less sense of spatial organisation.

Time required to sort out technical aspects really slows up class initially. More structured learning environment. Would LMs have intervened more if they had heard voices?

Having LS in the classes helped to keep things on track. Helps to work in tandem with someone who has expertise.

Used Cybergogy framework to set up classes, suggested activities.

Working with someone else online helps the sessions to run smoothly. Need for experts

Limitations of Second Life

58

on hands for specific problems.

Unless there is a use seen for the interface then there is little incentive to see it. There are some advantages of SL but they could potentially get 80% of the affordances by sharing on SketchUp and Skype.

One of the French students is still using SL islands to try out what can be done in virtual environments.

Virtual race in SL, which raises money but there were technical problems. Need to restrict and tweak to get what is wanted out of it. Financial model of Linden Lab struggling.

Would probably use OpenSim if we were to do it now.

59

Technological issues

Interviewee A: Synchronous event in SL was difficult and complex, all students said they did not need further language support based on their Crit Impact experience because there was lots of shared meaning. Related to real world architecture. Led by confident people with good language skills, others came to the fore in ODS who were shy in class, their written reflections were strong.

There were time constraints on the sessions, they would have liked a session between sessions, with MH, in communication, argumentation and negotiation. This was not present in SL. Used a floor plan of the previous week to see what language they had acquired. This was very revealing. Participatory design was an important part of the session as they were bored of seeing real-life buildings in Second Life. David Denton, former Gehry associate, had a site that they visited which was appreciated by students as it was very abstract and students loved it.

SL can be used well by architecture teachers if it is part of day-to-day day use and well supported. However, language learning in VW has different needs that add layers to what the students have to contend with.

60

Language skill development issues for CLIL

Remaining at a vocabulary level

Language skill development issues for CLIL

The perception and need for a CLIL approach

Interviewees C, D, E: to achieve a higher level would require more external motivation.

Interviewees C, D, E: Their level of difficulty in expressing themselves was high when English mediation/audience. Slovenian remained at a vocabulary levelARCHI21 was an artificial situation, but this was overcome.

Interviewee A: Similarly, students are positive about the CLIL approach, students in France don't need English, they like CLIL because they don't see that they are language learning. JB provided some texts about this work with language scaffolding beforehand.

61