طراحی چارچوب مفهومی یادگیری غیر رسمی محیط کار مبتنی بر یادگیری تکلیف محور (TC-IWL)
محورهای موضوعی : روش های نوین آموزش وتوسعه منابع انسانی
حمیده لطفی
1
,
مرتضی کرمی
2
*
,
سعید صفایی موحد
3
,
Gregory M Francom
4
1 - دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت آموزشی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد
2 - استاد گروه مطالعات برنامه درسی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد
3 - مشاور آموزش و توسعه منابع انسانی، شرکت ملی نفت ایران.
4 - گروه سیستم های آموزشی و توسعه نیروی کار، دانشگاه ایالتی می سی سی پی، ایالات متحده آمریکا.
کلید واژه: یادگیری غیر رسمی محیط کار, یادگیری تکلیف محور, چارچوب مفهومی, TC-IWL,
چکیده مقاله :
مطالعات نشان میدهند که 70 تا 90 درصد یادگیری در محیط کار غیر رسمی است. از سوی دیگر، یادگیری غیر رسمی ممکن است به دلیل ماهیت بدون ساختار و محدودیت‌های آن اثربخش نباشد. استفاده از مدل‌های یادگیری تکلیف محور که بر یادگیری براساس مسائل و تکالیف واقعی تمرکز دارند، می‌تواند در این زمینه مفید باشد. این مطالعه به منظور ایجاد یک چارچوب مفهومی برای طراحی یادگیری غیر رسمی محیط کار (IWL[1]) مبتنیبر یادگیری تکلیف محور (TCL[2]) انجام شد. بدین منظور دو مطالعه مقدماتی با استفاده از روش فراترکیب کیفی انجام و از نتایج آنها استفاده شد. این دو مطالعه برای شناسایی مهم‌ترین مؤلفه‌های یادگیری تکلیف محور و یادگیری غیر رسمی محیط کار انجام شد. در هر دو مطالعه، ما از رویکرد فراترکیب توصیه شده توسط ساندلوسکی و باروسو[3] (2006) استفاده کردیم. یافته‌ها نشان داد که اشتراکات فراوان چارچوبهای مفهومی یادگیری تکلیف محور و یادگیری غیر رسمی محیط کار، امکان توسعه یک چارچوب مفهومی مشترک را فراهم می‌کند. چارچوب مفهومی حاصل (TC-IWL) شامل پنج مؤلفه اصلی و 15 مولفه فرعی است: محرّک یادگیری (اصالت محرّک، محرّکهای زمینهای، محرّک شایستگی محور، تنوع و توالی محرّک)، کنش در محیط کار (درک تجربه جدید، سازگاری زمینه، تمرین تکمیلی)، حمایت و راهنمایی (مربیگری همتا، بازخورد چند منبعی، داربست مرتبه دوم، نمایش و واضحسازی)، خودراهبری (خود داربستسازی و خود ارزیابی)، و تأمل بر کنش.
The research literature indicates that 70 to 90 percent of workplace learning takes place in an informal manner. Meanwhile, informal learning may not be effective due to its unstructured nature and limitations. Using task-centered learning models that focus on learning based on real-world problems and tasks could be beneficial in this area. This study was conducted to propose a conceptual framework for designing informal workplace learning based on task-centered learning. For this purpose, two preliminary studies were conducted using the qualitative meta-synthesis method. These studies were conducted to identify the most significant components of task-centered learning and informal workplace learning. Both studies employed the meta-synthesis approach recommended by Sandelowski and Barroso (2006). The findings revealed that many commonalities of the conceptual frameworks of task-centered learning and informal workplace learning provide the possibility of developing a common conceptual framework. The resulting conceptual frameworks (TC-IWL) include five main components and 15 sub-components: Learning stimulus (stimulus authenticity, contextual stimulus, competency-oriented stimulus, stimulus sequence and stimulus variety), workplace action (understanding the new experience, context consistency, and additional practice), support and guidance (peer coaching, multi-source feedback, second-order scaffolding, demonstration, and clarifying), self-direction (self-scaffolding and self-evaluation), and reflection on action.
1. Sandelowski M, Barroso J. Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. springer publishing company; 2006 Jul 24.
2. Cerasoli CP, Alliger GM, Donsbach JS, Mathieu JE, Tannenbaum SI, Orvis KA. Antecedents and outcomes of informal learning behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business and Psychology. 2018 Apr;33:203-30.
3. Daniels S. Informal learning is vital to workforce development. Training+ Development. 2013;67(3):16.
4. Touré C, Michel C, Marty JC. How to promote informal learning in the workplace. InThe need for incremental design methods. Anals. Porto, Portugal: International Conference on Computer Supported Education 2017.
5. Marsick VJ, Volpe M. The nature and need for informal learning. Advances in developing human resources. 1999 Aug;1(3):1-9.
6. Jaziri-Bouagina D, Jamil GL, editors. Handbook of research on tacit knowledge management for organizational success. IGI Global; 2017 Apr 20.
7. Dale M, Bell J. Informal learning in the workplace. London: Department for Education and Employment; 1999 Aug.
8. Billett S. Learning through work: Workplace participatory practices. InWorkplace learning in context 2004 Jan 22 (pp. 125-141). Routledge.
9. Moore AL, Klein JD. Facilitating informal learning at work. TechTrends. 2020 Mar;64(2):219-28.
10. Rintala H, Nokelainen P, Pylväs L. Informal workplace learning: Turning the workplace into a learning site. InHandbook of vocational education and training 2019 (pp. 1-14). Springer.
11. Gerards R, de Grip A, Weustink A. Do new ways of working increase informal learning at work?. Personnel Review. 2021 Jun 22;50(4):1200-15.
12. Jeong S, Han SJ, Lee J, Sunalai S, Yoon SW. Integrative literature review on informal learning: Antecedents, conceptualizations, and future directions. Human Resource Development Review. 2018 Jun;17(2):128-52.
13. Unluhisarcikli O. Informal workplace learning experiences of graduate student employees. Australian Journal of Adult Learning. 2018 Apr;58(1):66-87.
14. Schürmann E, Beausaert S. What are drivers for informal learning?. European Journal of Training and Development. 2016 Apr 4;40(3):130-54.
15. Jeon KS, Kim KN. How do organizational and task factors influence informal learning in the workplace?. Human Resource Development International. 2012 Apr 1;15(2):209-26.
16. Kyndt E, Dochy F, Nijs H. Learning conditions for non‐formal and informal workplace learning. Journal of Workplace Learning. 2009 Jul 3;21(5):369-83.
17. Clardy A. 70-20-10 and the dominance of informal learning: A fact in search of evidence. Human Resource Development Review. 2018 Jun;17(2):153-78.
18. Francom GM, Gardner J. What is task-centered learning?. TechTrends. 2014 Sep;58:27-35.
19. Argelagós E, Garcia C, Privado J, Wopereis I. Fostering information problem solving skills through online task-centred instruction in higher education. Computers & Education. 2022 Apr 1;180:104433.
20. Badali M, Hatami J, Farrokhnia M, Noroozi O. The effects of using Merrill’s first principles of instruction on learning and satisfaction in MOOC. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 2022 Mar 4;59(2):216-25.
21. Costa JM, Miranda GL, Melo M. Four-component instructional design (4C/ID) model: A meta-analysis on use and effect. Learning Environments Research. 2022 Jul;25(2):445-63.
22. Odo I, Agwagah UN, Ugwuanyi CC, Shiaki OB, Nwoye MN, Emeji EI, Okeke AM, Osakwe IJ, Okeke CI, Ugwuanyi CS. Effectiveness of First Principles of Instruction in promoting high Achievement of students in Mathematics: Implications for physics teaching. Journal of Critical Reviews. 2021;8(2):119-28.
23. Corbalan G, Kester L, Van Merriënboer JJ. Towards a personalized task selection model with shared instructional control. Instructional Science. 2006 Sep;34(5):399-422.
24. Rosenberg-Kima RB, Merrill MD, Baylor AL, Johnson TE. Explicit instruction in the context of whole-tasks: the effectiveness of the task-centered instructional strategy in computer science education. Educational technology research and development. 2022 Oct;70(5):1627-55.
25. Van Merriënboer JJ, Kester L. Whole-task models in education. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology 2008 Sep 25 (pp. 441-456). Routledge.
26. Dennen VP. Cognitive apprenticeship in educational practice: Research on scaffolding, modeling, mentoring, and coaching as instructional strategies. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology 2013 Jan 11 (pp. 804-819). Routledge.
27. Reigeluth, C. The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequence decisions (95). In Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory. 1999: 2: (pp. 425-453).
28. Merrill M. D. A task-centered instructional strategy. Journal of research on Technology in Education. 2007 Sep 1; 40(1):5-22.
29. Frerejean J, van Geel M, Keuning T, Dolmans D, van Merriënboer JJ, Visscher AJ. Ten steps to 4C/ID: training differentiation skills in a professional development program for teachers. Instructional Science. 2021 Jun;49:395-418.
30. Kirschner P, Van Merrienboer JJ. Ten steps to complex learning: A new approach to instruction and instructional design. In21st century education: A reference handbook 2008 (pp. 244-253). SAGE Publications Ltd.
31. Van Merriënboer JJ, Kirschner PA. Ten steps to complex learning: A systematic approach to four-component instructional design. Routledge; 2017 Oct 23.
32. Van Merriënboer JJ, Kirschner PA. 4C/ID in the context of instructional design and the learning sciences. International handbook of the learning sciences. 2018 Apr 19:169-79.
33. Merrill MD. First principles of instruction. John Wiley & Sons; 2012 Oct 6.
34. Jacobs RL, Park Y. A proposed conceptual framework of workplace learning: Implications for theory development and research in human resource development. Human resource development review. 2009 Jun; 8(2):133-50.
35. Marsick, V. J., and Watkins, K. Informal and Incidental Learning in the Workplace. 1990. London: Routledge.
36. Lange C, Costley J. Opportunities and lessons from informal and non-formal learning: Applications to online environments. American Journal of Educational Research. 2015 Jul 25;3 (10):1330-6.
37. Eraut M. Non-formal learning, implicit learning and tacit knowledge in Coffield F. The necessity of informal learning. 2000.
38. Driscoll M, Carliner S. Advanced web-based training: Adapting real world strategies in your online learning.
39. Eraut M. Informal learning in the workplace. Studies in continuing education. 2004 Jul 1; 26(2):247-73.
40. Eraut M. Learning from other people in the workplace. Oxford review of education. 2007 Sep 1;33(4):403-22.
41. Schugurensky D. The forms of informal learning: Towards a conceptualization of the field.2000. Toronto: Centre for the Study of Education and Work, OISE/UT.
42. Tannenbaum SI, Beard RL, McNall LA, Salas E. Informal learning and development in organizations. InLearning, training, and development in organizations 2009 Aug 6 (pp. 303-331). Routledge.
43. Decius J, Schaper N, Seifert A. Informal workplace learning: Development and validation of a measure. Human Resource Development Quarterly. 2019 Dec;30(4):495-535.
44. Cacciattolo K. Defining workplace learning. European Scientific Journal. 2015 May 1.
45. Manuti A, Pastore S, Scardigno AF, Giancaspro ML, Morciano D. Formal and informal learning in the workplace: A research review. International journal of training and development. 2015 Mar;19(1):1-7.
46. Cofer DA. Informal Workplace Learning. Practice Application Brief No. 10.
47. Lohman MC. Environmental inhibitors to informal learning in the workplace: A case study of public school teachers. Adult education quarterly. 2000 Feb;50(2):83-101.
48. Marsick VJ, Watkins KE. Informal and incidental learning. New directions for adult and continuing education. 2001 Mar;2001(89):25-34.
49. Marsick, V., Watkins, K., Callahan, W., & Volpe, M. Informal and Incidental Learning in the Workplace. In Handbook of Research on Adult Learning and Development. 2008. Routledge.
50. Marsick VJ, Neaman A. Adult informal learning. Informelles Lernen: Standortbestimmungen. 2018:53-72.
51. Billett S. Towards a model of workplace learning: The learning curriculum. Studies in continuing education. 1996 Jan 1;18(1):43-58.
52. Francom GM, Gardner JL. How task-centered learning differs from problem-based learning: Epistemological influences, goals, and prescriptions. Educational Technology. 2013 May 1:33-8.
53. Kester L, Paas F, Van Merriënboer JJ. Instructional control of cognitive load in the design of complex learning environments. InCognitive load theory 2010 (pp. 109-130). Cambridge University Press.
54. Van Merriënboer JJ, Kirschner PA, Kester L. Taking the load off a learner's mind: Instructional design for complex learning. Educational psychologist. 2003 Jan 1;38(1):5-13.
55. Corbalan G, Kester L, Van Merriënboer JJ. Towards a personalized task selection model with shared instructional control. Instructional Science. 2006 Sep;34(5):399-422.
56. Francom GM. Principles for task-centered instruction. Instructional-Design Theories and Models, Volume IV: The Learner-Centered Paradigm of Education. 2016 Jul 22:65.
57. Dennen VP, Burner KJ. The cognitive apprenticeship model in educational practice. InHandbook of research on educational communications and technology 2008 Sep 25 (pp. 425-439). Routledge.
58. Feinstein RE. Descriptions and reflections on the cognitive apprenticeship model of psychotherapy training & supervision. Journal of contemporary psychotherapy. 2021 Jun;51(2):155-64.
59. Gavriel J. Cognitive apprenticeship. Education for Primary Care. 2015 Nov 2;26(6):422-3.
60. Frerejean J, van Merriënboer JJ, Kirschner PA, Roex A, Aertgeerts B, Marcellis M. Designing instruction for complex learning: 4C/ID in higher education. European Journal of Education. 2019 Dec;54(4):513-24.
61. Merrill MD. First principles of instruction. Educational technology research and development. 2002 Sep;50:43-59.
62. Eraut M. Informal learning in the workplace: evidence on the real value of work‐based learning (WBL). Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal. 2011 Aug 23;25(5):8-12.
63. Carliner S. Informal learning. Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology. Boston, MA: Pearson. ISBN-13. 2017:978-0.
64. Steinert Y. Learning from experience: from workplace learning to communities of practice. InFaculty development in the health professions: a focus on research and practice 2013 Dec 17 (pp. 141-158). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
65. Boud D, Rooney D. The potential and paradox of informal learning. Informal learning at work: Triggers, antecedents, and consequences. 2018 Jan 19.
66. Collin K. Connecting work and learning: design engineers' learning at work. Journal of Workplace Learning. 2006 Oct 1;18(7/8):403-13.
67. Schei V, Nerbø I. The invisible learning ceiling: Informal learning among preschool teachers and assistants in a Norwegian kindergarten. Human Resource Development Quarterly. 2015 Sep;26(3):299-328.
68. Ellström PE. Integrating learning and work: Problems and prospects. Human resource development quarterly. 2001 Dec;12(4):421-35.
69. Rogers A. The base of the iceberg: Informal learning and its impact on formal and non-formal learning. Verlag Barbara Budrich; 2014.
70. Billett S. Guided learning at work. Journal of Workplace learning. 2000 Nov 1;12(7):272-85.
71. Gola G. Informal learning of social workers: a method of narrative inquiry. Journal of Workplace Learning. 2009 May 14;21(4):334-46.
72. Enos MD, Kehrhahn MT, Bell A. Informal learning and the transfer of learning: How managers develop proficiency. Human Resource Development Quarterly. 2003 Dec;14(4):369-87.
73. Ladyshewsky R. Peer coaching. The complete handbook of coaching. 2014;2:285-97.
74. Lu HL. Research on peer coaching in preservice teacher education–A review of literature. Teaching and teacher education. 2010 May 1;26(4):748-53.
75. Donegan MM, Ostrosky MM, Fowler SA. Peer coaching: Teachers supporting teachers. Young exceptional children. 2000 Jun;3(3):9-16.
76. Noroozi O, Kirschner PA, Biemans HJ, Mulder M. Promoting argumentation competence: Extending from first-to second-order scaffolding through adaptive fading. Educational psychology review. 2018 Mar;30:153-76.
77. Rosenstand CA. Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. 2012.
78. Bennett EE. A four-part model of informal learning: Extending Schugurensky's conceptual model. 2012.
79. Van Merriënboer J. How people learn. The Wiley handbook of learning technology. 2016 Apr 20:15-34.
80. Cunningham J, Hillier E. Informal learning in the workplace: key activities and processes. Education+ Training. 2013 Feb 8;55(1):37-51.