You are here:

A Formative Analysis of Instructional Strategies for Using Learning Objects
Article

, , , University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Canada

Journal of Interactive Learning Research Volume 20, Number 3, ISSN 1093-023X Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

To date, limited research has been done examining and evaluating the instructional wrap for using learning objects effectively. The current study examined instructional strategies used by 15 teachers to integrate learning objects into 30 secondary school classrooms (510 students). Four key areas were examined: preparation time, purpose for using a learning object, integration strategies, and time spent using a learning object. A small, but significant, correlation was observed between preparation time and student attitudes toward learning objects. When the purpose of using a learning object was to introduce a concept before a formal lesson, motivate students, or teach a new concept, student attitudes and performance were significantly higher. On the other hand, choosing to use a learning object after a formal lesson or to review a concept resulted in significantly lower student attitudes and performance. Regarding integration strategies, providing a guiding set of questions was associated with more positive student attitudes and increased performance, whereas allowing students to explore on their own (without direction) and class discussion after use led to significantly lower student attitudes and performance. Finally, time spent using learning objects was inversely correlated with student attitudes and performance. It is reasonable to conclude that decisions about instructional wrap had a significant impact on the effectiveness of learning objects in a secondary school environment.

Citation

Kay, R., Knaack, L. & Muirhead, B. (2009). A Formative Analysis of Instructional Strategies for Using Learning Objects. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 20(3), 295-315. Waynesville, NC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 10, 2024 from .

© 2009 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Agostinho, S., Bennett, S., Lockyear, L., & Harper, B. (2004). Developing a learning object metadata application profile based on LOM suitable for the Australian higher education market. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 20(2), 191-208.
  2. Akpinar, Y., & Bal, V. (2006). Student tools supported by collaboratively authored tasks: The case of work learning unit. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17(2), 101-119.
  3. Ally, M. (2004). Designing effective learning objects. In R. McGreal (Ed), Online education using learning objects (pp. 87-97). London: Routledge Falmer.
  4. Alonso, F., Lopez, G., Manrique, D., & Vines, J.M. (2005). An instructional model for web-based e-learning education with a blended learning process approach. British Journal of Educa-310 Kay, Knaack, and Muirhead
  5. Bennett, K., & McGee, P. (2005). Transformative power of the learning object debate. Open Learning, 20(1), 15-30.
  6. Bradley, C., & Boyle, T. (2004). The design, development, and use of multimedia learning objects. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(4), 371-389.
  7. Bratina, T.A., Hayes, D., & Blumsack, S.L. (2002). Preparing teachers to use learning objects. The Technology Source Archives. Retrieved January 10, 2007 from http://technologysource.org/ Article/preparing_teachers_to_use_learning_objects/
  8. Brush, T., & Saye, J. (2001). The use of embedded scaffolds with hypermedia-supported student-centered learning. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 10(4), 333-356.
  9. Carey, T., Swallow, J., & Oldfield, W. (2002). Educational rationale metadata for learning objects. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 28(3). Retrieved July 1, 2005 from http://www.cjlt.ca/content/vol28.3/carey_etal.html
  10. Caws, C., Friesen, N., & Beaudoin, M. (2006). A new learning object repository for language learning: Methods and possible outcomes. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 2006(2), 112-124.
  11. Cochrane, T. (2005). Interactive QuickTime: Developing and evaluating multimedia learning objects to enhance both face-to-face and distance e-learning environments. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 1. Retrieved August 3, 2005 from http://ijklo.org/Volume1/v1p033-054Cochrane.pdfCOHEREGroup(2002).Thelearningobjecteconomy:Implicationsfordevelopingfacultyexpertise.CanadianJournalofLearningandTechnology,28(3).RetrievedJuly1,2005fromhttp://www.cjlt.ca/content/vol28.3/cohere.html
  12. Collis, B. & Strijker, A. (2004). Technology and human issues in reusing learning objects. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2004(1), 1-32.
  13. Concannon, F., Flynn, A., & Campbell, M. (2005). What campus-based students think about the quality and benefits of e-learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 501-512.
  14. Deaudelin, C., Dussault, M., & Brodeur, M. (2003). Human-computer interaction: A review of the research on its affective and social aspects. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 29(1), 89-110. Retre ived June 1, 2000 from http://www.cjlt.ca/content/vol29.1/05_deaudelin_etal.html
  15. Docherty, C., Hoy, D., Topp, H., & Trinder, K. (2005). E-Learning techniques supporting problem based learning in clinical simulation. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 74(7-8), 527-533.
  16. Gadanidis, G., Gadanidis, J., & Schindler, K. (2003). Factors mediating the use of online applets in the lesson planning of pre-service mathematics teachers. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 22(4), 323-344.
  17. Haughey, M., & Muirhead, B. (2005). Evaluating learning objects for schools. E-Journal of Instructional Sciences and Technology, 8(1). Retrieved June 1, 2007 from http://www.usq.edu.au/electpub/e-jist/docs/vol8_no1/fullpapers/eval_learnobjects_school.htm
  18. Kay, R.H., & Knaack, L. (2005). Developing learning objects for secondary school students: A multicomponent model. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 1, 229-254.
  19. Kenny, R.F., Andrews, B.W., Vignola, M.V., Schilz, M.A., & Covert, J. (1999). Towards guidelines for the design of interactive multimedia instruction: Fostering the reflective decision-making of preservice teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 7(1), 13-31.
  20. Kong, S.C., & Kwok, L.F. (2005). A cognitive tool for teaching the addition/subtraction of common fractions: A model of affordances. Computers and Education, 45(2), 245-265.
  21. Koppi, T., Bogle, L., & Lavitt, N. (2004). Institutional use of learning objects: lessons learned and future directions. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(4), 449-463.
  22. Lim, C.P., Lee, S.L., & Richards, C. (2006). Developing interactive learning objects for a computing mathematics models. International Journal on E-Learning, 5(2), 221-244.
  23. Liu, M. & Bera, S. (2005). An analysis of cognitive tool use patterns in a hypermedia learning environment. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 53(1), 5-21.
  24. Mason, R., Pegler, C., & Weller, M. (2005). A learning object success story. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(1). Retreived June 1, 2007 from http://www.sloan-C.org/publications/ Jaln/v9n1/v9n1_mason.asp
  25. Mayer, R.E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist, 59(1), 14-19.
  26. McCormick, R., & Li, N. (2005). An evaluation of European learning objects in use. Learning, Media and Technology, 31(3), 213-231.
  27. McGreal, R. (2004). Learning objects: A practical definition. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 1(9). Retrieved August 5, 2005 from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Sep_04/article02.htm
  28. Moyer, P.S. (2001). Are we having fun yet? How teachers use manipulatives to teach mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47(2), 175-197.
  29. Oliver, R., & McLoughlin, C. (1999). Curriculum and learning-resources issues arising from the use of web-based course support systems. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 5(4), 419-435.
  30. Poldoja, H., Leinonen, T., Valjataga, T., Ellonen, A., & Priha, M. (2006). Progressive inquiry learning object templates (PILOT). International Journal on E-Learning, 5(1), 103-111.
  31. Reimer, K., & Moyer, P.S. (2005). Third-graders learning about fractions using virtual manipulatives: 312 Kay, Knaack, and Muirhead
  32. Rieber, L.P., Tzeng, S., & Tribble, K. (2004). Discovery learning, representation, and explanation within a computer-based simulation: Finding the right mix. Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 307-323.
  33. Schoner, V., Buzza, D., Harrigan, K., & Strampel, K. (2005). Learning objects in use: ‘Lite’ assessment for field studies. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 1-18.
  34. Thorpe, M., Kubiak, C., & Thorpe, K. (2003). Designing for reuse and versioning. In A. Littlejohn (Ed.), Reusing online resources (pp.116-120). London, UK: Kogan Page.
  35. Van Merrienboer, J.J.G. (2005). Research on cognitive load theory and its design implications for e-learning. Education Theory, Research and Development, 53(3), 1042-1629.
  36. Van Zele, E., Vandaele, P., Botteldooren, D., & Lenaerts, J. (2003). Implementation and evaluation of a course concept based on reusable learning objects. Journal of Educational Computing and Research, 28(4), 355-372.
  37. Weller, M. (2004). Learning objects and the e-leaning cost dilemma. Open Learning, 19(3), 293-302.
  38. Wiley, D.A. (2000). Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. In D.A. Wiley (Ed.), The Instructional Use of Learning Objects: Online Version. Retrieved July, 1, 2005, from http://reusability.org/read/chapters/wiley.doc Wiley, D., Waters, S., Dawson, D., Lambert, B., Barclay, M., & Wade, D. (2004). Overcoming the limitations of learning objects. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(4), 507-521.
  39. Windschitl, M., & Andre, T. (1998). Using Computer Simulations to Enhance Conceptual Change: The Roles of Constructivist Instruction and Student Epistemological Beliefs. Journal of A Formative Analysis of Instructional Strategies for Using Learning Objects 313

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

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Also Read

Related Collections

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts