You are here:

Balancing Online and In-class Activities Using the Learning Activity Management System (LAMS)
PROCEEDINGS

, , , The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Vancouver, Canada ISBN 978-1-880094-62-4 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

Many classroom activities are sequential and structured and teachers are used to this kind of learning design. However, online learning environments are often disorderly and uncontrolled, and offered to students as a free smorgasbord. The paper describes a bridge between the two learning environments through the use of a web-based learning activity management system (LAMS). In the two cases described in the paper structured, flexible web-based tasks are provided which can be used both for online self-study and in a classroom setting. The study has found preliminary evidence of success in gaining the acceptance of students and teachers for the ideas of adding control to online learning activities while adding flexibility to classroom teaching. Obstacles and challenges have been recorded in the two cases and are converted into practical ideas for improvement.

Citation

Lam, P., Au Yeung, M. & McNaught, C. (2007). Balancing Online and In-class Activities Using the Learning Activity Management System (LAMS). In C. Montgomerie & J. Seale (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2007--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 3603-3612). Vancouver, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 14, 2024 from .

© 2007 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Azevedo, R., Guthrie, J.T., & Seibert, D. (2004). The role of self-regulated learning in fostering students’ conceptual understanding of complex systems with hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(1), 87– 111.
  2. Bain, J.D., & McNaught, C. (2006). How academics use technology in teaching and learning: Understanding the relationship between beliefs and practice. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(2), 99– 113.
  3. Cagiltay, N.E., Yildirim, S., & Aksu, M. (2006). Students’ preferences on web-based instruction: Linear or nonlinear. Educational Technology& Society, 9 (3), 122–136. Retrieved April 4, 2007, from http://www.ifets.info/journals/9_3/11.pdf
  4. Dalziel, J. (2003). Implementing learning design: The learning activity management system (LAMS). In G. Crisp, D. Thiele, I. Scholten, S. Barker& J. Baron (Eds.), Interact, Integrate, Impact (pp. 593–596), Proceedings of
  5. McNaught, C., Lam, P., Keing, C., & Cheng, K.F. (2006). Improving eLearning support and infrastructure: An evidence-based approach. In J.O’Donoghue (Ed.). Technology supported learning and teaching: A staff perspective (pp. 70–89). Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing.
  6. Oliver, A.W., & Oliphant, J. (1998). Comparing two learning strategies implemented within a CAL program. Retrieved April 4, 2007, from http://www.herts.ac.uk/ltdu/about/who_we_are/andrew/papers/CELTIC.DOC Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.), New York: Free Press.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References