Suscripción a Biblioteca: Guest
International Journal on Innovations in Online Education

Publicado 4 números por año

ISSN Imprimir: 2377-9519

ISSN En Línea: 2377-9527

H-Index: 3

Indexed in

CHANGING MINDSET, PERCEPTIONS, LEARNING, AND TRADITION: AN "ADAPTIVE TEACHING FRAMEWORK" FOR TEACHING MUSIC ONLINE

Volumen 4, Edición 2, 2020, 17 pages
DOI: 10.1615/IntJInnovOnlineEdu.2020035150
Get accessDownload

SINOPSIS

This paper is based on the reflections and experiences from a participant researcher perspective and explores the creation of an inventory of core pedagogical components, called the adaptive teaching framework (ATF), for use in online teaching. This was developed as part of a graduate music teaching program (MTP) across more than 20 tertiary subjects. It involves a series of reflections, descriptions, discussion points, and suggestions, which specifically reference related learning theory, content review, modification of learning design, and pedagogy that were considered during the implementation of a new learner management system (LMS) platform (Canvas) at the start of 2020. Amid the initial phase of implementation, staff and students were also required to move suddenly into a fully online learning environment, as the COVID-19 pandemic took hold and the subsequent lockdown removed all face-to-face teaching, an essential part of the MTP that included music performance, classroom pedagogy, curriculum design, research, and ensemble performance, as examples of some of the wide-ranging subject areas. These two significant changes (LMS implementation and the COVID-19 pandemic) occurred concurrently, which heightened both the immediacy and demand for adaptive teaching design within a fully implemented online program. The paper overviews the development of the ATF, in response to these mandated changes, just three weeks into Semester One, 2020. The methodology employed was self-study and aspects of critical reflective practice, whereby the researcher reflected on the intersection of technology and 21st century learning in music education, drawing on established literature, research, and emerging learning models combined with creative pedagogies.

REFERENCIAS
  1. Benade, L. (2015). Teachers' critical reflective practice in the context of twenty-first century learning. Open Review of Educational Research, 2(1), 42-54. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 23265507.2014.998159.

  2. Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (2003). 'In praise of educational research': Formative assessment. British Educational Research Journal, 29(5), 623-637. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/0141192032000133721.

  3. Boehm, C. (2007). The discipline that never was: Current developments in music technology in higher education in Britain. Journal of Music, Technology and Education, 1 (1), 7-21. https://doi.org/10.1386/jmte.11.7_1.

  4. Broadbent, J. (2016). Academic success is about self-efficacy rather than frequency of use of the learning management system. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2634.

  5. Chen, M. A., Hwang, G., and Chang, Y. (2019). A reflective thinking-promoting approach to enhancing graduate students' flipped learning engagement, participation behaviors, reflective thinking and project learning outcomes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2288-2307. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12823.

  6. Croom, A. M. (2015). Music practice and participation for psychological well-being: A review of how music influences positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment. Musicae Scientiae, 19(1), 44-64. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1029864914561709.

  7. Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset. the new psychology of success. New York: Ballantine Books.

  8. Dye, K. (2016). Student and instructor behaviors in online music lessons: An exploratory study. International Journal of Music Education, 34(2), 161-170. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0255761415584290.

  9. Heinonen, J. and Poikkijoki, S. (2006). An entrepreneurial-directed approach to entrepreneurship education: Mission impossible? Journal of Management Development, 25(1), 80-94. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621710610637981.

  10. Jeno, L. M., Adachi, P. J. C., Grytnes, J.-A., Vandvik, V., and Deci, E. L. (2019). The effects of m-learning on motivation, achievement and well-being: A self-determination theory approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(2), 669-683. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12657.

  11. Johnson, C. (2017). Teaching music online: Changing pedagogical approach when moving to the online environment. London Review of Education, 15(3), 439-456.

  12. Kaliisa, R., Palmer, E., and Miller, J. (2019). Mobile learning in higher education: A comparative analysis of developed and developing country contexts: Mobile learning in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(2), 546-561. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12583.

  13. Kaschub, M. and Smith, J. (Eds.). (2014). Promising practices in 21st century music teacher education. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/ acprof:oso/9780199384747.001.0001.

  14. Kazanidis, I., Pellas, N., Fotaris, P., and Tsinakos, A. (2019). Can the flipped classroom model improve students' academic performance and training satisfaction in higher education instructional media design courses? British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(4), 2014-2027. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12694.

  15. King, A., Prior, H., and Waddington-Jones, C. (2019a). Connect resound: Using online technology to deliver music education to remote communities. Journal of Music, Technology and Education, 12(2), 201-217. https://doi.org/10.1386/jmte_00006_1.

  16. King, A., Prior, H., and Waddington-Jones, C. (2019b). Exploring teachers' and pupils' behaviour in online and face-to-face instrumental lessons. Music Education Research, 21 (2), 197-209. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2019.1585791.

  17. Krause, A. E., Davidson, J. W., and North, A. C. (2018). Musical activity and well-being: A new quantitative measurement instrument. Music Perception, 35(4), 454-474. https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2018.35.4.454.

  18. Lai, C. (2020). Trends of mobile learning: A review of the top 100 highly cited papers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(3), 721-742. https://doi.org/10.1111/ bjet.12884.

  19. Lamont, A. (2012). Emotion, engagement and meaning in strong experiences of music performance. Psychology of Music, 40(5), 574-594. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0305735612448510.

  20. Martin, F., Tutty, J. I., and Su, Y. (2010). Influence of learning management systems self- efficacy on e-learning performance. I-Manager's Journal on School Educational Technology, 5(3), 26-35. https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.5.3.1086.

  21. McLoughlin, C. (2001). Inclusivity and alignment: Principles of pedagogy, task and assessment design for effective cross-cultural online learning. Distance Education, 22(1), 7-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158791010220102.

  22. Merrick, B. (2006). The relationship between self-efficacy and self-regulated behaviour within a secondary school music technology based creative learning environment [Doctoral dissertation, University of New South Wales]. http://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/fapi/ datastream/unsworks:1082/S0URCE1?view=true.

  23. Merrick, B. M. (1997). Teaching teachers to use technology in the classroom-A model for inservice training. In V. Weidenbach (Ed.), Conceptualising Music Education Research. Proceedings of the XVIII Annual Conference (p. 4). Sydney: AARME.

  24. Merrick, B. and Mifsud, A. (2015). Innovative and inspired learning environments in music education: Technology and the blended classroom. In J. Rosevear (Ed.), Educating for life. ASMEXXth National Conference Proceedings. (p. 7). Victoria: ASME.

  25. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2018). The future we want. OECD. http://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project/about/documents/.

  26. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2019). PISA 2021 creative thinking framework. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA-2021-creative-thinking-framework.pdf.

  27. Perkins, D. (2004). Knowledge alive. Educational Leadership, 62(1), 14-19.

  28. Samaras, A. P. (2011). Self-study teacher research: Improving your practice through collaborative inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

  29. Smidt, E., Li, R., Bunk, J., Kochem, T., and McAndrew, A. (2017). The meaning of quality in an online course to administrators, faculty, and students. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 28(1), 23.

  30. Smith, J. and Brown, A. (2005). Building a culture of learning design: Reconsidering the place of online learning in the tertiary curriculum. ASCILITE 2005 Balance, Fidelity, Mobility: Maintaining the Momentum, 10.

  31. Soland, J., Hamilton, L. S., and Stecher, B. M. (2013). Guidance for educators. Measuring 21st Century Competencies, 70.

  32. Sweeney, T., West, D., Groessler, A., Haynie, A., Higgs, B. M., Macaulay, J., Mercer-Mapstone, L., and Yeo, M. (2017). Where's the transformation? Unlocking the potential of technology-enhanced assessment. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 5(1), 1-13. https://cora.ucc.ie/handle/10468/3907.

  33. Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2014). Blending online asynchronous and synchronous learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i2.1778.

  34. Yuan, E.S. (2020) A message to our users. https://blog.zoom.us/a-message-to-our-users/.

  35. Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.1207/ s15326985ep2501_2.

  36. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64-70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2?.

  37. Zimmerman, B. J. and Kitsantas, A. (2002). Acquiring writing revision and self-regulatory skill through observation and emulation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 660-668. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.4.660.

CITADO POR
  1. Alvarez Jorge, Del Angel Deyanira, Martinez Manuel, Edpuzzle and Canvas as distance learning tools during the lockdown, 2021 IEEE International Conference on Engineering Veracruz (ICEV), 2021. Crossref

  2. Joseph Dawn, Trinick Robyn, ‘Staying Apart Yet Keeping Together’: Challenges and Opportunities of Teaching During COVID-19 Across the Tasman, New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 56, 2, 2021. Crossref

  3. Joseph Dawn, Lennox Lucy, Twists, turns and thrills during COVID-19: music teaching and practice in Australia, Music Education Research, 23, 2, 2021. Crossref

  4. Pudaruth Santosh Kumar, Online teaching and learning of Hindustani classical vocal music: Resistance, challenges, and opportunities, in Academic Voices, 2022. Crossref

  5. Martínez-Hernández Ana, Conservatory and music schoolteachers’ experiences with videoconferencing software during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, Distance Education, 43, 3, 2022. Crossref

  6. Merrick Bradley, Wilson Emily, The Brave New World of Tertiary Teaching, in Handbook of Research on Facilitating Collaborative Learning Through Digital Content and Learning Technologies, 2023. Crossref

Portal Digitalde Biblioteca Digital eLibros Revistas Referencias y Libros de Ponencias Colecciones Precios y Políticas de Suscripcione Begell House Contáctenos Language English 中文 Русский Português German French Spain