An Elaborative Conception of Learner Differences

2021 ◽  
pp. 23-46
Author(s):  
William D. Rohwer
Keyword(s):  
Learner Differences

scholarly journals Maximizing Learning Potential with Multimodality: A Case Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samaa Haniya ◽  
Anastasia Olga Tzirides ◽  
Matthew Montebello ◽  
Keratso Georgiadou ◽  
Bill Cope ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Online Communication ◽  
Online Course ◽  
Learning Potential ◽  
Digital World ◽  
Communication Environments ◽  
Digital Learners ◽  
E Learning ◽  
Learner Differences ◽  
Multimodality Approach

<p><em>In today’s increasingly fast-moving digital world, learners are immersed in multimodal online communication environments in their daily life, through Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat and others. This requires educators to reflect the environment in which these learners live, and thus design instructional practices from a multimodal perspective. Multimodality offers new opportunities for digital learners to express themselves, analyze problems and make meaning in multimodal ways as they interpret knowledge differently according to their various educational needs (Kalantzis </em><em>&amp;</em><em> Cope, 2015). In this paper we will discuss the significance of integrating multimodality in e-Learning contexts to make meaning and improve learning. The paper will also present a case study of an online course from the College of Education at the University of Illinois Urbana Champaign to show how multimodality works in practice to cater to learner differences by offering a range of activity options and modes of meaning. We will also examine learners’ perceptions of adopting such an approach in the online course. We used survey techniques for data collection and quantitative and qualitative methods for data analysis. Results revealed illuminating insights about the importance of multimodality approach to increase learning potential for digital learners and provided suggestions for future iterations.</em></p>

A Constructivist Desktop Virtual Reality-Based Approach to Learning in a Higher Education Institution

2019 ◽  
pp. 258-283
Author(s):  
Serpil Meri-Yilan
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Reality ◽  
Learning Environment ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Education Institution ◽  
Constructivist Approach ◽  
Approach To Learning ◽  
Desktop Virtual Reality ◽  
High System ◽  
Learner Differences ◽  
Desktop Vr

Virtual reality (VR) technology has recently started shaping learning, especially language learning, with the aim of immersing learners into a VR learning environment. However, because of the high system cost of fully immersive VR, desktop VR has been implemented and preferred in educational settings. Based on a constructivist approach, desktop VR has drawn attention to the need for learner autonomy and an authentic VR learning environment. Therefore, this chapter describes empirical research on desktop VR-based learning using a constructivist approach. The research examined university students' interaction and perceptions of learning in this kind of learning environment. Based on the empirical findings gathered from observations and interviews, this chapter has aimed to discuss not only the issues observed both in previous studies and in this chapter, but also additional issues such as scaffolding, self-paced learning, collaboration, and learner differences in order for learning to occur in a well-designed desktop VR learning environment.

Questioning Prompts to Examine Blended PK-20 Learning Environments

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Neal Shambaugh
Keyword(s):  
Public School ◽  
Learning Outcomes ◽  
Graduate Programs ◽  
Instructional Delivery ◽  
Academic Program ◽  
Pedagogical Issues ◽  
Blended Instruction ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Use Of Technology ◽  
Learner Differences

The decision to deliver a course or an academic program must address issues of learning outcomes and curriculum, what is to be taught along with choices of pedagogy or how the content is taught, as well as face-to-face or online delivery. The question of whether or not online or blended instruction is more effective than face to face teaching is not about the delivery decision but about curriculum and pedagogical issues. A set of questioning prompts, organized by public school and undergraduate/graduate programs, help educators systematically think through issues of learner differences, learning outcomes, teaching options, including the use of technology and instructional delivery approaches. Best practices are organized by public school and undergraduate/graduate programs. Research questions are suggested.

scholarly journals The Contributions of Crosslinguistic Influence and Individual Differences to Nonnative Speech Perception

Languages ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 49
Author(s):  
Charles B. Chang ◽  
Sungmi Kwon
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Posttest Performance ◽  
L2 Development ◽  
Nonnative Language ◽  
Stages Of Learning ◽  
Learner Differences ◽  
L2 Perception ◽  
Crosslinguistic Influence ◽  
Nonnative Speech Perception

Perception of a nonnative language (L2) is known to be affected by crosslinguistic transfer from a listener’s native language (L1), but the relative importance of L1 transfer vis-a-vis individual learner differences remains unclear. This study explored the hypothesis that the nature of L1 transfer changes as learners gain experience with the L2, such that individual differences are more influential at earlier stages of learning and L1 transfer is more influential at later stages of learning. To test this hypothesis, novice L2 learners of Korean from diverse L1 backgrounds were examined in a pretest-posttest design with respect to their perceptual acquisition of novel L2 consonant contrasts (the three-way Korean laryngeal contrast among lenis, fortis, and aspirated plosives) and vowel contrasts (/o/-/ʌ/, /u/-/ɨ/). Whereas pretest performance showed little evidence of L1 effects, posttest performance showed significant L1 transfer. Furthermore, pretest performance did not predict posttest performance. These findings support the view that L1 knowledge influences L2 perception dynamically, according to the amount of L2 knowledge available to learners at that time. That is, both individual differences and L1 knowledge play a role in L2 perception, but to different degrees over the course of L2 development.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document