Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The online learning process and scaffolding in student teachers’ personal learning environments

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) enable lifelong learning and make competences visible in education and professional life. This paper illuminates how to design an online learning process that enables deep learning through PLEs based upon our study of a scaffolding process supported by Web 2.0 tools. Professional student teachers developed their own blogs as PLEs, and we collected data from five student teacher groups. We employed the DIANA pedagogical model to design a dialogical, collaborative, and authentic learning process before comparing its activities against the activities of the five-stage model for scaffolding designed for online learning processes. The results indicate that the DIANA model includes the elements of the five-stage model, and it appears that teacher scaffolding is particularly important in student PLEs. These findings provide insights to other practitioners seeking to design and implement online learning processes that are based on collaborative knowledge construction utilizing students’ Personal Learning Environments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aarnio, H. (2006). Oppijalähtöisyyttä ja yhteisöllisyyttä tietoverkkoja ja verkostoja hyödyntävään oppimiseen – Tutkimustuloksia DIANA-klinikalta [Enhancing learner-centredness and collaboration in learning online and in networks – results from DIANA clinic]. Saarijärvi: Saarijärven Offset Oy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aarnio, H., & Enqvist, J. (2004). Kohti tiedon yhdessä luomista verkossa: DIANA-projekti [towards collaborative knowledge creation online: DIANA-project 2002–2003]. Saarijärvi: Saarijärven Offset Oy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aarnio, H., & Enqvist, J. (2016). DIANA-mallistako kehys digiajan oppimiselle [DIANA model – A framework for learning in the digital age]. Ammattikasvatuksen aikakauskirja, 18(3).

  • Abram, S. (2007). Web 2.0, Library 2.0, and Librarian 2.0: Preparing for the 2.0 World. In S. Ricketts & C. Birdie & E. Isaksson (Eds.), Library and Information Services in Astronomy V: Common Challenges, Uncommon Solutions (pp. 161–166). Massachusetts: ASP Conference Series.

  • Agostinho, S., Bennet, S., Lockyer, L., Jones, J., & Harper, B. (2013). Learning Designs as a Stimulus and Support for Teachers’ Design Practices. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age (pp. 119–132). New York: Roudledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aramo-Immonen, H., Ammirato, S. & Jussila, J. (2016). Blogging as a virtual co-learning environment in international course context in L. Gómez Chova, A. López Martínez, I. Candel Torres (Eds.). Barcelona: 8 th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies. Edulearn16 conference, Barcelona, Spain.

  • Attwell, G. (2007). Personal learning environments – The future of learning?, eLearning Papers 2(1). http://www.informelleslernen.de/fileadmin/dateien/Informelles_Lernen/Buecher_Dokumente/Attwell_2007-ple.pdf. Accessed 12 March 2017.

  • Barajas, M., & Frossard, F. (2017). Mapping creative pedagogies in open wiki learning environments. Education and Information Tehcnologies, 23(3), 1403–1419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bassani, P., & Barbosa, D. (2018). Experiences with web 2.0 in school settings: A framework to foster educational practices based on a personal learning environment perspective. Educacao em Revista, 34. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-4698162010.

  • Beetham, H. (2013). Designing for learning in an uncertain future. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age (pp. 258–281). New York: Roudledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. (1992). . Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.

  • Bouhnik, D., & Deshen, M. (2014). WhatsApp goes to school: Mobile instant messaging between teachers and students. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 13, 217–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bower, M., & Hedberg, J. (2010). A quantitative multimodal discourse analysis of teaching and learning in a web-conferencing environment – The efficacy of student-centred learning designs. Computers & Education, 54, 462–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castaneda, L., & Adell, J. (2013). Beyond the tools: Analyzing personal and group learning environments in a university course. Culture and Education, 26(4), 739–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, P., Confrey, J., Disessa, A., & Lehrer, R. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. American Educational Research Assosiation, 32(1), 9–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dabbagh, N. (2003). Scaffolding: An important teacher competency in online learning. TechTrends, 47(2), 39–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dabbgah, N., & Fake, H. (2017). College students’ perceptions of personal learning environment through the Lens of digital tools, processes and spaces. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 6(1), 28–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng, L., & Yuen, A. (2011). Towards a framework for educational affordances of blogs. Computers & Education, 56, 441–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to Second Language Research (pp. 33–56). Norwood: Albex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler, S. (2013). Emancipating and Developing Learning Activity: Systemic Intervention and Re-Instrumentation in Higher Education. Doctoral dissertation. University of Turku. Centre of learning research. http://www.doria.fi/handle/10024/77017. Accessed 12 March 2017.

  • Fiedler, S. & Väljataga, T. (2013). Personal learning environments: a conceptual landscape revisited. eLearning Papers 35. https://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/sites/default/files/legacy_files/asset/In-depth_35_2_1.pdf. Accessed 12 March 2017.

  • Fishman, B., Penuel, W., Allen, A.-R., Cheng, B., & Sabelli, N. (2013). Design-based implementation research: An emerging mode for transforming the relationship of research and practice. In J. Fishman, B. Penuel, A.-R. Allen, & B. Cheng (Eds.), Design-based implementation research: Theories, methods and exemplars (pp. 136–156). New York: National Society for Study of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galanis, N., Mayol, E., Alier, M., & Garcia-Penalvo, F. (2016). Supporting, evaluating and validating informal learning. A social approach. Computers in Human Behaviour, 55(A), 596–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goktas, Y., & Demirel, T. (2012). Blog-enhanced ICT courses: Examining their effects on prospective teachers’ ICT competencies and perceptions. Computers & Education, 58, 908–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodyear, P. (2002). Teaching online. In N. Hativa & P. Goodyear (Eds.), Teacher thinking, beliefs and knowledge in higher education (pp. 79–101). Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2008). Educational research. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed approaches. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karpanos, E., Teixeira, P., & Gouveia, R. (2016). Need fulfillment and experiences on social media: A case on Facebook and WhatsApp. Computers in Human Behaviour, 55(B), 888–897.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kear, K., Chetwynd, F., Williams, J., & Donelan, H. (2012). Web conferencing for synchronous online tutorials: Perspectives of tutors using a new medium. Computers & Education, 58(3), 953–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • LeMahieu, P., Norstrum, L., & Potvin, A. (2017). Design-based implementation research. Quality Assurance in Education, 25(1), 26–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ludvigsen, S., Cress, U., Law, N., Rosé, C., & Stahl, G. (2016). Collaboration scripts and scaffolding. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11, 381–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsick, V., Watkins, K., Callahan, M. & Volpe, M. (2006). Reviewing theory and research on informal and incidental learning. Retrieved from ERIC on 2017-11-29 https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED492754.pdf

  • Mayes, t., & de Freitas, S. (2013). Review of learning theories, frameworks and models. London: Joint Information Systems Committee.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muukkonen, H., Hakkarainen, K., & Lakkala, M. (2004). Computer-mediated progressive inquiry in higher education. In T. S. Roberts (Ed.), Online Collaborative Learning: Theory and Practice (pp. 28–53). Hershey: Information Science Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Olofsson, A., Lindberg, J., & Fransson, G. (2017). What do upper secondary school teachers want to know from research on the use of ICT and how does this inform a research design? Education and Information Technologies, 22(6), 2897–2915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Özkan, B. & McKenzie, B. (2008). Social Networking Tools for Teacher Education. In: K. McFerrin, R. Weber, R. Carlsen & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2008 (pp. 2772–2776). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

  • Paavola, S., & Hakkarainen, K. (2005). The knowledge creating metaphor: An emergent epistemological approach to learning. Science and Education, 14(6), 535–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar, A. (1998). Keeping the metaphor of scaffolding fresh — A response to C. Addison Stone's “the metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities”. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(4), 370–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penuel, W., Fishman, B., Cheng, B., & Sabelli, N. (2011). Organizing Research and Development at the intersection of learning, implementation, and Design. Educational Researcher, 40(7), 331–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puntambekar, S., & Hübscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed? Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quadir, B., & Chen, N.-S. (2015). The effects of reading and writing habits on learning performance in a blog learning environment. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24(4), 635–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahimi, E., van den Berg, J. & Veen, W. (2012). Designing and Implementing PLEs in a Secondary School Using Web 2.0 Tools. In The Personal Learning Envrionment (PLE) Conference Melbourne 2012.

  • Rahimi, E., van den Berg, J., & Veen, W. (2015). Facilitating student-driven constructing of learning environments using web 2.0 personal learning environments. Computer & Education, 81, 235–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, J. (2011). The educational affordances of blogs for self-directed learning. Computers & Education, 57, 1628–1644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruhalahti, S., Korhonen, A.-M., & Ruokamo, H. (2016). The dialogical authentic Netlearning activity (DIANA) model for collaborative knowledge construction in mOOC. The Online Journal of Distance Education and e-Learning, 4(2), 58–67 http://www.tojdel.net/journals/tojdel/volumes/tojdel-volume04-i02.pdf. Accessed 12 March, 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruhalahti, S., Korhonen, A.-M., & Rasi, P. (2017). Authentic dialogical knowledge construction: Blended and mobile teacher education program. Educational Research, 59(4), 373–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahin, S., & Uluyol, C. (2016). Preservice teachers’ perception and use of personal learning environments (PLEs). International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(2), 141–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, G. (2003). Emoderating the key to teaching & learning online. Oxon: Taylor & Francis Books Ltd..

    Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, G. (2013). E-tivities: The key to active online learning. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, C. (1998). The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(4), 344–364.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, J., Tang, T., & Chiang, C. (2014). Blog learning: Effects of users’ usefulness and efficiency towards continuance intention. Behaviour & Information Technology, 33(1), 36–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teräs, H. (2016). Design principles of an authentic online professional development program for multicultural faculty. Academic dissertation. University of Tampere, School of Education. Tampere, Finland: Tampere University Press.

  • Valtonen, T., Hacklin, S., Dillon, P., Vesisenaho, M., Kukkonen, J., & Hietanen, A. (2012). Perspectives on personal learning environments held by vocational students. Computers & Education, 58, 732–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2011). Scaffolding in teacher-student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vuojärvi, H. (2013) Conceptualising Personal and Mobile Learning Environments in Higher Education. Doctoral dissertation, University of Lappland. http://lauda.ulapland.fi/handle/10024/61642. Accessed 12 March 2017.

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Q., & Woo, H. (2010). Investigating students’ critical thinking in weblogs: An exploratory study in a Singapore secondary school. Asia Pasific Education Review, 11, 541–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, S. (2015). Learning with’e’s Educational theory and practice in the digital age. Llandysul: Gomer Press.

  • Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. The Journal of Psychology and Psychiatry, 11(2), 89–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, J., Quadir, B., Chen, N.-S., & Miao, Q. (2016). Effects of online presence on learning performance in a blog-based online course. Internet and Higher Education, 30, 11–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, Department of Teacher Education, University of Turku, Assistentinkatu 5, 20014, Turku, Finland

    A.-M. Korhonen & M. Veermans

  2. School of Professional Teacher Education, Häme University of Applied Sciences, Hämeenlinna, Finland

    A.-M. Korhonen & S. Ruhalahti

  3. Faculty of Education, Centre for Media Pedagogy, University of Lapland, Yliopistonkatu 8, 96300, Rovaniemi, Finland

    S. Ruhalahti

Authors
  1. A.-M. Korhonen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Ruhalahti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Veermans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A.-M. Korhonen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1

Source: created by the authors.

Original instruments in Finnish; translated into English for publication purposes.

Questionnaire RQ 1.1.

  1. 1.

    It was not only possible to participate in the course solely on a mobile device, but also on a traditional computer. Which apps did you use on your mobile device?

    • Blogger

    • WhatsApp

    • Google Drive

    • Facebook

  2. 2.

    Was the teacher’s blog sufficient as the course learning environment and as the scaffolding channel?

    • Yes

    • No

    • I don’t know

    • Other

  3. 3.

    What comments do you have concerning the teacher’s course blog learning environment?

  4. 4.

    Was your study circle blog sufficient as a Personal Learning Environment?

    • Yes

    • No

    • I don’t know

    • Other

  5. 5.

    What issues could be developed? Which other web tools could be suitable for the course in question?

  6. 6.

    How did the chosen web tools for communication (e.g., Facebook, WhatsApp) work among the whole study circle?

    • Well

    • Quite well

    • Quite poorly

    • Poorly

    • Other

  7. 7.

    How did the chosen web tools for communication work among your study circle? If you used some other communication web tools, please name it below under “other.”

    • Well

    • Quite well

    • Quite poorly

    • Poor

    • Other

  8. 8.

    Please provide your comments on the web tools used.

Appendix 2

Comparison of the DIANA model and the five-stage model.

Source: created by the authors.

Original instruments in Finnish; translated into English for publication purposes.

DIANA

Activities

Web 2.0 application

Five-stage model

A Creating common ground for collaborative learning

Teacher designs and creates an open learning environment with materials, instructions (also for web tools), and learning process.

Blogger (teacher)

1 Access and motivation

Teacher writes welcome message with instructions for starting.

Blogger (teacher)

1 Access and motivation

Study circles are formulated.

face-to-face / Webex

1 Access and motivation

Teacher suggests some web tools for collaborative usage.

face-to-face / Webex

1 Access and motivation

The learning process starts and web tools are selected.

face-to-face / Webex

1 Access and motivation

Students give links to their PLEs. Teacher gives links from the teacher’s environment to students PLEs.

WhatsApp

2 Online socializations

Specific, relevant, and open learning materials (theory) related to topics are given in the teacher’s environment, and students are instructed to read them.

Blogger (teacher)

3 Infomation exchange

B Enabling authenticity in learning

Teacher writes a blog text: "What are authentic questions and how do we formulate them?"

Blogger (teacher)

1 Access and motivation

Students start to create authentic learning questions.

Blogger (students)

2 Online socializations

Teacher gives authentic and supporting scaffolding in study circles’ learning environments (blogs) related to composing authentic learning questions on the course topic in line with learning goals.

Blogger (students)

3 Infomation exchange

Teacher engages all members of the study circles in discussion of knowledge building.

Blogger (teacher)

4 Knowledge construction

Teacher makes assessments during the guidance process to encourage student progress.

Blogger (students)

4 Knowledge construction

Teacher sends messages in WhatsApp, such as informative brief messages and reminders. Students ask questions and reply.

WhatsApp

4 Knowledge construction

Teacher takes part in discussion in study circle blogs and makes the discussion relevant by referring to learning goals.

Blogger (students)

4 Knowledge construction

Teacher asks students to compose learning questions related to real-life work situations based on theory.

Blogger (students)

5 Development

Teacher requires all to attend to the discussion and knowledge-building process.

WhatsApp

4 Knowledge construction

Teacher gives feedback and recognizes students’ achievements.

Blogger (students)

5 Development

C Increasing deep-oriented learning through dialogical actions

Blog text provides specific instructions for the learning task and use of learning materials. It also reflects on the whole study circle’s development so far.

Blogger (teacher)

2 Online socializations

Through online discussion, the teacher asks further questions and gives new approaches to making the study circle work towards qualitative artifacts.

Blogger (students)

2 Online socializations

Teacher asks students to answer their authentic questions with practical answers.

Blogger (students)

3 Infomation exchange

Teacher reminds students about deadlines.

WhatsApp

3 Infomation exchange

Some members of the study circles take on the role of facilitator to fulfill learning tasks.

Blogger (students)

4 Knowledge construction

Teacher gives space to students for making artifacts.

Blogger (teacher)

5 Development

Study circles independently complete artifacts.

Blogger, Google tools (e.g., Drawings) Mindmap tools

5 Development

D Integrating theory and practice in learning situations

Teacher gives instructions for peer-assessment and self-assessment, requiring a reflective approach.

Blogger (teacher)

2 Online socializations

Students give peer-assessment.

face-to-face/Webex

3 Infomation exchange

Students write responses and conduct self-assessment.

Blogger (students)

5 Development

Teacher writes blog text about final grades and gives thanks for the course by reflecting on all actions.

Blogger (teacher)

5 Development

Appendix 3

Source: created by the authors.

Original instruments in Finnish; translated into English for publication purposes.

Questionnaire RQ 1.3. (process data after each cornerstone of the DIANA model)

  1. 1.

    What kind of scaffolding was needed in each cornerstone of the DIANA model to promote learning process?

    • Teacher’s blog texts

    • Instructions in the teacher’s blog

    • WhatsApp for the whole group

    • Discussion forum for the study circle (e.g., WhatsApp)

    • Comments of one’s own study circle members in your own blog

    • Teacher’s comments on the study circle’s blog

    • Other

    • Webex meeting (conference call only during cornerstone B)

  2. 2.

    Did all members of the study circle take part in collaborative work?

    • Yes

    • No

    • I don’t know

    • Other

  3. 3.

    Were all members of your study circle in good dialogue with each other on your blog?

    • Yes

    • No

    • I don’t know

    • Other

  4. 4.

    Were teacher’s comments and assessments helpful in your learning environment (blog)?

    • Yes

    • No

    • I don’t know

    • Other

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Korhonen, AM., Ruhalahti, S. & Veermans, M. The online learning process and scaffolding in student teachers’ personal learning environments. Educ Inf Technol 24, 755–779 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9793-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9793-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation