Advertisement

Vocations and Learning

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 215–239 | Cite as

Mobile and Online Learning Journal: Effects on Apprentices’ Reflection in Vocational Education and Training

  • Laetitia Mauroux
  • Karen D. Könings
  • Jessica Dehler Zufferey
  • Jean-Luc Gurtner
Original Paper

Abstract

While learning journals (LJs) have been shown to support self-regulated learning strategies, reflection and learning outcomes in academic contexts, few studies have investigated their relevance in vocational education. A mobile and online learning journal (MOLJ) was developed to support reflection on workplace experiences. However, acceptance of the mobile and online learning journal by apprentices and supervisors is not trivial. This study investigated how apprentices use the mobile and online learning journal and why they use it that way. The mobile and online learning journal was developed for apprentices in the field of bakery and contains a recipe book, a smartphone app to take pictures of workplace experiences, and a learning journal for reflection. Apprentices’ workplace supervisors have access to the mobile and online learning journal to provide support and feedback. A mixed method study was conducted with 16 apprentices. Indicators of their use of the mobile and online learning journal were recorded, while reasons for use were studied by questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Four kinds of users of the mobile and online learning journal were identified: Multifunction users, picture takers, learning journal users, and overall low users. The most determining factors for the acceptance and use of the mobile and online learning journal by apprentices were their interest in the use of a smartphone at the workplace, their acceptance of reflection on workplace experiences through the mobile and online learning journal, and supervisors’ participation and provision of feedback. Promoting the use of learning journals by apprentices requires strong guidance in the design of the learning journal as well as support and feedback from supervisors. Taking pictures from the workplace proves useful for learning and sharing experience in vocational training.

Keywords

Learning journal Vocational education and training Workplace Mobile learning Reflection Acceptance 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was conducted in the framework of a leading House called “Technologies for Vocational Training”. Project supported by the SERI (http://www.sbfi.admin.ch/berufsbildung/01528/01529/01535/index.html?lang=en).

Supplementary material

References

  1. Abrami, P., Wade, A., Pillay, V., Aslan, O., Bures, E. M., & Bentley, C. (2008). Encouraging self-regulated learning through electronic portfolios. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 34(3), 1–39.Google Scholar
  2. Akerlind, G. S., & Trevitt, A. C. (1999). Enhancing self-directed learning through educational technology: when students resist the change. Innovations in Education and Training International, 36(2), 96–105. doi: 10.1080/1355800990360202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berger, J.-L., & Karabenick, S. A. (2011). Motivation and students’ use of learning strategies: evidence of unidirectional effects in mathematics classrooms. Learning and Instruction, 21(3), 416–428. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.06.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berthold, K., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2007). Do learning protocols support learning strategies and outcomes? The role of cognitive and metacognitive prompts. Learning and Instruction, 17(5), 564–577. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Billett, S. (2001). Workplace affordances and individual engagement at work. For full text: http://www.avetra.org.au/PAPERS%202001/billett.pdf. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=ED456261.
  6. Billett, S. (2004). Workplace participatory practices: conceptualising workplaces as learning environments. Journal of Workplace Learning, 16(6), 312–324. doi: 10.1108/13665620410550295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  8. Bourgeois, E., & Chapelle, G. (2011). Apprendre et faire apprendre. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  9. Cattaneo, A., Dehler Zufferey, J., Dillenbourg, P., Bétrancourt, M., & Gurtner, J.-L. (submitted). The “Erfahrraum”: a model for exploiting educational technologies in dual vocational systems. Computers and Education.Google Scholar
  10. Challis, D. (2005). Towards the mature ePortfolio: some implications for higher education. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology / La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 31(3). Retrieved from http://cjlt.csj.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/93.
  11. Cools, E., & Van den Broeck, H. (2007). Development and validation of the cognitive style indicator. Journal of Psychology, 141(4), 359–387. doi: 10.3200/JRLP.141.4.359-388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  13. Davis, F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dewey, J. (1938/1965). Experience and Education. New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  15. Driessen, E. W., van Tartwijk, J., Overeem, K., Vermunt, J. D., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2005). Conditions for successful reflective use of portfolios in undergraduate medical education. Medical Education, 39(12), 1230–1235. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02337.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ellström, P.-E. (2011). Informal learning at work: conditions, processes and logics: SAGE Knowledge. Retrieved from http://knowledge.sagepub.com/view/hdbk_workplacelearning/n8.xml.
  17. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.Google Scholar
  18. Evans, K., Guile, D., Harris, J., & Allan, H. (2010). Putting knowledge to work: a new approach. Nurse Education Today, 30(3), 245–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fox-Turnbull, W. (2009). stimulated recall using autophotography-a method for investigating technology education. Strengthening the position of technology education in the curriculum. Delft, The Netherlands: International Technology and Engineering Educators Association. Retrieved from http://www.iteea.org/Conference/PATT/PATT22/FoxTurnbull.pdf.
  20. Harper, D. (2002). Talking about pictures: a case for photo elicitation. Visual Studies, 17(1), 13–26. doi: 10.1080/14725860220137345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harris, M. (2005). Is journaling empowering students’ perceptions of their reflective writing experience. Health SA Gesondheid, 10(2), 47–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hetzner, S., Gartmeier, M., Heid, H., & Gruber, H. (2013). Error orientation and reflection at work. In Supporting reflection in vocational educational and training. Symposium conducted at the 15th Biennial Conference for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI), München.Google Scholar
  23. Huberman, M. A., & Miles, M. B. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 428–444). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Hübner, S., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2010). Writing learning journals: instructional support to overcome learning-strategy deficits. Learning and Instruction, 20(1), 18–29. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.12.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hume, A. (2009). Promoting higher levels of reflective writing in student journals. Higher Education Research & Development, 28(3), 247–260. doi: 10.1080/07294360902839859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jossberger, H., Brand-Gruwel, S., Boshuizen, H., & Van de Wiel, M. (2010). The challenge of self-directed and self-regulated learning in vocational education: a theoretical analysis and synthesis of requirements. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 62(4), 415–440. doi: 10.1080/13636820.2010.523479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kicken, W., Brand-Gruwel, S., Van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Slot, W. (2009). The effects of portfolio-based advice on the development of self-directed learning skills in secondary vocational education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(4), 439–460. doi: 10.1007/s11423-009-9111-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kramarski, B., & Michalsky, T. (2010). Preparing preservice teachers for self-regulated learning in the context of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 20(5), 434–447. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.05.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. L’Écuyer, R. (1990). Méthodologie de L’Analyse Développementale de Contenu: Méthode Gps et Concept de Soi. PUQ.Google Scholar
  30. Mauroux, L., Dehler Zufferey, J., Jimenez, F., Wehren, R., & Gurtner, J.-L. (2013). Autorégulation des apprentissages et dossiers de formation en formation professionnelle. In J.-L. Berger & F. P. Büchel (Eds.), L’apprentissage autorégulé : Perspectives théoriques et recherches empiriques (pp. 195–227). Nice: Ovadia.Google Scholar
  31. McCrindle, A. R., & Christensen, C. A. (1995). The impact of learning journals on metacognitive and cognitive processes and learning performance. Learning and Instruction, 5(2), 167–185. doi: 10.1016/0959-4752(95)00010-Z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. McKeachie, W. J. (1987). Teaching and learning in the College classroom. A Review of the research literature (1986) and November 1987 Supplement. Program on Curriculum, NCRIPTAL, 2400 School of Education Building, University of Michigan. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED314999.
  33. Moreland, J., & Cowie, B. (2007). Young children taking picture of technology and science. University of Waikato, 172–181. Retrieved from http://www.tenz.org.nz/2007/Tech_Paper18.pdf
  34. Nückles, M., Hübner, S., & Renkl, A. (2009). Enhancing self-regulated learning by writing learning protocols. Learning and Instruction, 19(3), 259–271. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.05.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pachler, N. (2013). Theory—the London mobile learning group—LMLG. Retrieved from http://www.londonmobilelearning.net/#theory.php?state=3.
  36. Pachler, N., Cook, J., & Bachmair, B. (2010). Appropriation of mobile cultural resources for learning. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 2(1), 1–21. doi: 10.4018/jmbl.2010010101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). Multiple goals, multiple pathways: the role of goal orientation in learning and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 544–555. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.92.3.544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Priddey, L., & Williams, S. (1996). Reflective Portfolio writing: a case study of its impact on personal development and professional competencies for training and development staff in the United Kingdom financial sector. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 1(3), 291–310. doi: 10.1080/1359674960010302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Raizen, S. A. (1994). Learning and work: The research base. In Vocational education and training for youth: Towards coherent policy and practice (pp. 69–115). Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  40. Rausch, A. (2013). Task characteristics and learning potentials—empirical results of three diary studies on workplace learning. Vocations and Learning, 6(1), 55–79. doi: 10.1007/s12186-012-9086-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Renkl, A., Mandl, H., & Gruber, H. (1996). Inert knowledge: analyses and remedies. Educational Psychologist, 31(2), 115–121. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep3102_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Richemont Professional School. (2007). Les qualités idéales. Lucerne: Suisse. Retrieved from http://www.richemont.cc/fr/256/Les-qualites-ideales.htm.
  43. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  44. Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 460–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. SERI - State Secretariat for Education, Research and innovation SERI. (2011). Professional ordinance of bakery and pastry cook training. Retrieved from http://www.sbfi.admin.ch/bvz/grundbildung/index.html?detail=1&typ=EFZ&lang=fr&item=1139
  46. Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2007). A theory of learning for the mobile age. In The SAGE Handbook of E-Learning Research (pp. 221–247). 1 Oliver’s Yard, 55 City Road, London EC1Y 1SP United Kingdom: SAGE Publications Ltd. Retrieved from http://knowledge.sagepub.com/view/hdbk_elearningrsch/n10.xml
  47. Smith, M. L. (2006). Multiple methodology in education research. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli, & P. B. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research (pp. 457–475). United Kingdom: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. Stevenson, J., & Willott, J. (2008). Attitudes towards reflective practice: emerging findings from a TQEF study. Assessment, Teaching & Learning Journal (Leeds Met), 3, 46–51.Google Scholar
  49. Taylor, A., & Freeman, S. (2011). “Made in the trade”: youth attitudes toward apprenticeship certification. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 63(3), 345–362. doi: 10.1080/13636820.2011.570455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Van den Boom, G., Paas, F., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2007). Effects of elicited reflections combined with tutor or peer feedback on self-regulated learning and learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 17(5), 532–548. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. doi: 10.2307/30036540.Google Scholar
  53. Wade, R. C., & Yarbrough, D. B. (1996). Portfolios: a tool for reflective thinking in teacher education? Teaching and Teacher Education, 12(1), 63–79. doi: 10.1016/0742-051X(95)00022-C.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Waycott, J. (2004). The Appropriation of PDAs as learning and workplace tools: an activity theory perspective. Retrieved from http://kn.open.ac.uk/public/document.cfm?docid=10321.
  55. Weber, S. (2013). Sense of workplace learning. Vocations and Learning, 6(1), 1–9. doi: 10.1007/s12186-012-9092-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. New York: McMillan Publishing Company. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED237180.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laetitia Mauroux
    • 1
  • Karen D. Könings
    • 2
  • Jessica Dehler Zufferey
    • 3
  • Jean-Luc Gurtner
    • 4
  1. 1.UER Enseignement, Apprentissage et ÉvaluationHaute École Pédagogique du Canton de Vaud (HEP Vaud)LausanneSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of Educational Development and Research, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life SciencesMaastricht UniversityMaastrichtThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Computer-Human Interaction Lab for Learning and Instruction EPFLLausanneSwitzerland
  4. 4.Department of EducationUniversity of FribourgFribourgSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations