SO tba.
but here's a start:
Learning:
Guided Participation - GW
Theory:Zone of Proximal Development - GW How it informs our design:
- For group learning opportunities
* we will orient space to maximize group interaction * provide reflection booklets so people can capture key understandings, challenges, and curiosities * structure sessions for consistent groups united by common interest - build a community of practice
Theory:Legitimate Peripheral Participation - GW
How it informs our design:
- For individual learners:
* environment contains visual stories of how technology has been used to gather health info * environment contains displays that includes tangible health related info * environment enables observation of classess directly or indirectly via video so as to encourage first-stage learning.
- For groups:
* Instruction is 'guide on the side' versus 'sage on the stage' * Mirrors on ceiling (a la cooking classes) enables viewing of an instructor/expert's procedural execution * Classes are offered repeatedly so that students can gradually assume more active roles in demonstrations and engage in 'authentic activity'.
Theory:Shulman's New Table of Learning - GW
- Engagement and Motivation
- Concierge support to match learning need to available offerings
- Visual display of success stories with whom our users can identify.
Knowledge and Understanding
- Access to pre-assessment to determine knowledge gaps and development priorities.
- Associated targeted learning activities.
- Post assessment for tests of knowledge transfer
Performance and Action
- Simulation / activity space for routine medical procedures
Reflection and Critique
- Personal journal
- FAQ space
Judgment and Design
- Build/modify course materials (user generated content)
Commitment and Identity
- Ranking system with complementary environmental visuals.
Theory: Social vs. Shared Learning-NS
Packer, J., & Ballantyne, R. (2005) Solitary vs. Shared Learning: Exploring the Social Dimensions of Museum Learning. Curator: The Museum Journal. Vol.48 (2). Pp. 177- 192.
Researchers in museums have found that museum solitary visitors and group visitors engage with exhibits in different ways. Therir finding s “suggest that there may be a learning advantage in having access to a social context that is consistent with the learner’s preferred approach. Those who visit alone, for example, value being able to engage in personal reflection without distractions; those who visit in company value being able to share the experience and discuss ideas with others.” (Packer and Ballantyne, 2005)
Since we are designing the telecenter for both individuals and groups of users, and because we plan to have rotating mini-“exhibits” on various health topics throughout the center, we thought that it would be a good idea to let these museum design concepts inform our own design.
Therefore, we will:
- Have a quiet space for individual users to learn and reflect without distraction.
- Have sufficient space around individual workstations to reduce distraction from other users.
- Have loud spaces—the classroom and the courtyard where users can “share the experience and discuss ideas” *together.
- Provide many shared experiences—such as health-related classes, movies, and workshops to prompt discussion and a sense of community.
Display of Cultural Knowledge
Theory: Model of the Inquiry Cycle for Science Learning
Allen, S. Designs for Learning: Studying Science Museum Exhibits that do More Than Entertain. Science Education Vol. 88. No. 1 pp 17-S33. 2004.
Sue Allen describes the following as a model for the “Inquiry Cycle” she would like museum visitors to go through as they explore an exhibit.
Surprising phenomenon
Exploration
Explanation
Relevance
Allen believed this model was successful because it “emphasized the aspects of science most easily and pleasurably learned in a physically complex and chaotic environment,” it “de-emphasized many other aspects of science, including anything requiring memorization…or anything requiring long chains of inference or effortful thinking” and it “articulated (through its label) and supported (through its physical design) a simple cycle of inquiry.” (Allen, 2004)
We hope to use this model of inquiry as a basis for some of the displays in the telecenter. Posters or displays would be very visual or physical, would be written in plain language, and would be labeled, numbered and placed in such a way as to clearly show the each element’s place in the inquiry cycle. For example, taking an example from a WebMD story, we might construct the following display.
Surprising phenomenon Poster with the quote: “A new study shows smoking was the leading lifestyle factor affecting the progression of periodontal disease. Second to smoking in terms of worsening periodontal disease was not getting enough sleep.” Next to models or pictures of teeth and gums in various stages of decay.
Exploration A physical display inviting visitors to guess how many packs a day/hours of sleep a day would lead to the conditions shown in the picture. Then visitors could reveal the answers and see how close their instincts were.
Explanation A short animation available from a link on all the computers Briefly explaining the connection between oral health, sleep and smoking. Here is an example animation created by the American Dental Association that we might use. http://www.ada.org/public/games/animation/interface.asp
Relevance A computer-based quiz available on each of the computers asking about the user’s health habits, evaluating those habits and giving advice on how to improve their oral health.
We could tailor some of these sequential inquiry exhibits to either timely health issues, and put them in the public spaces, and create others related to content in continuing education classes, and put those in the classroom.
Expert vs. Novice Knowledge Structures and Conceptual Models - GW
- Traditional ApprenticeshipCognitive Apprenticeship
Design:
Theory: Immediate Apprehendability-NS Allen defines “immediate apprehendability” as designing a “stimulus or larger environment such that people introduced to it for the first time will understand its purpose, scope, and properties almost immediately and without conscious effort.” This is critically important for us as designers of a space to facilitate learning about health where the users are not necessarily using the space in order to learn about health, and/or have no interest in learning about health!
So, we will break this down into the parts Allen identifies:
- Purpose: we could change the title of the telecenter to reflect its new purpose. (Technology and Health Education Center, Kamuli Healthy Computer Café, whatever) Or we could just make sure that some of the décor reflects the space’s new purpose—equal numbers of posters on health and technology news, for example. We’ve also thought of adding more health-related magazines and books to the library.
- Scope: we’d like to make it clear that the scope of healthcare learning can, through the internet, extend well beyond the center. We would therefore be sure to advertise the continuing education classes/community workshops within the center itself, and at clinics. Also, we would provide a health-oriented start page for each computer that would invite people to check out reliable health information online, but without forcing them to this information.
- Properties: Two posters near the entrance, or maybe outside “advertising” the affordances of the space. Maybe they could say “What you can do: Technology—1. Check your email, 2. Surf the Internet, 3. Make copies…” and “What you can do: Health—1. View our health exhibits 2. Sign up for a class (health professionals) or a workshop (anyone) 3. Look up health information online—in public or private kiosk” These lists could also be the screensavers on the monitors, so people would immediately be reminded of all the things they can do in the center, both in terms of technology and health education
Familiar Activities as Schemas-NS
Conceptual Coherence
Personas
Scenarios