affective 2010 Jones

Ann Jones (2010)

Affective issues in learning technologies: emotional responses to technology and technology’s role in supporting socio-emotional skills

Journal of Interactive media in education

http://jime.open.ac.uk/2010/09

Considers the topic of affective issues in learning technologies by looking back at two projects ( Cicero in 1980 and Bubble dialogue in 1990s) and making comparisons between findings then and more recent work.

Note article also talks about anxiety

Definition of affect

Based on Oates & Nudy (1996) encompases , emotion, mood, attitude and value

Case study 1 -1980 – Cicero

students ( Brain and Behaviour) booked sessions at Regional centre. 4 interactive sessions available

Methods

questionnaires before, during, and after specifically looking at reactions, expectations, attitude.

37% used it – unprompted response from several that they found it to be fun

58% intended to do so.

Follow up interviews at Residential school as to why it was not used

P6 ‘in informal interviews, students were prepared to reveal more about their fears that they expressed in questionniares’

Findings

Barriers

· Scared

· Embarrassed about using it in front of others

· Iy or 2 y reports of a bad computer experience.

These findings were fed back into the construction of the final questionnaire when it was confirmed. ( KRO then don’t want to repeat this when students are working with others)

Students made a cost/ benefit analysis of perceived need which in turn depended on how well it was integrated into the course , the decision depending on the influence of affective factors ie fear, lack of confidence, embarrassment.

Led to a model of barriers that operated at three stages

· Access to hardware,

· access to the program,

· access to the course.

But p6 ‘ doesn’t point up inter-relatedness of the different barriers’

Comparisons with now

Kirkwood and Price (2008) assessment important for take up p 7 ‘ influences what gets studied and how it gets studied’

Confidence and access remain as issues

Case- study 2 Bubble dialogue -1990s nb one of the themes is about handling conflict

P15 ‘ The powerful aspects of bubble dialogue are

Cartoon like graphics, role play, identification, thought/specch distiction, layers of mediation

‘ can express difficult emotions without having to ‘own’ them by ascribing them to the characters that they role play’

2 levels of mediation

children involved didn’t talk directly to a person but interact through a computer, also the child is a character

Affective and social : Jones & Issroff(2007)

Ann Jones and Kim Issroff (2007)

Learning technologies: Affective and social issues

In Conole & Oliver (2007)

Affect can cover emotion, mood, attitude & value

Cook (2000) argued that collaboration was motivating. Argument for this coheres around the idea that participants develop shared histories and shared meanings.

What are the elements that motivate?

· P191 Keller & Suzuki (1988, book) Keller’s ARCS – attention, relevance, confidence, satisfaction.

· Issroff & del Sddata (1996) identified 4 motivational factors namely curiousity, challenge, confidence and control

· Eales et al (2002) distinguish between

1. authentic motivation – related to a focus on the development of robust, long term knowledge

2. inauthentic motivation – focused on assessment and the tactics of schooling

This led onto ideas about the importance of ownership for motivation.

Focus on Research contexts

Since the 1980s research on motivation is more likely to be carried out in real learning contexts rather than being lab based.

193 Jarvela, 2001,4. ‘motivation is no longer a separate variable or a distinct factor, which can be applied in explanations of an individuals’s readiness to act or learn – but it is reflective of the social and cultural environment’ (KRO partly true but…. I would rather say that using only a lab based approach is never going to be totally satisfactory)

Studies

Face to face

P195 face to face with children – the importance of affinity and attraction (Issroff and also Vass refs)

CMC

· Wegerith (1998) ‘individual success or failure on one online course depended on the extent to which students were able to cross a threshold from felling like outsiders to feeling like insiders’

· Tolmie & Boyle (2000) review the factors influencing the success of CMC environments in university teaching. P196 ‘Some of them are affective factors and others involve affective considerations’ Size of group ( if too large the participants cannot get to know each other sufficiently for trust to develop), knowledge of other participants, student experience, ownership of the task , need for/ the function of CMC.

· Preece (2000) ‘ argues for the importance of sociability in communications that depend on trust, collaboration and appropriate styles of communication. Preece has a particular concern with empathy and has analysed the nature of empathetic support across a number of online communities’

Reflection and evaluation

P201 From an evaluation perspective ‘ what are the desired outcomes from the use of technology?’

‘what aspects of learning situations influence students’ affections’ ( KRO possible research question ).