Chris Chandler Representations Review
Cloud created by:
7 April 2013
Healthy Eating in CADMOS and Healthy Eating as A 4Ts Model
The CADMOS learning design consisted of two parts, the first being the model that described the different roles and resources that would be needed in the activity and the second part was the flow model which illustrated the path through the lesson for all the different participants.
This learning design was relatively easy to understand and having both models helped to visualize the lesson as the creator intended it. The various lesson components and stages are well described (if a little light on detail) and it is relatively easy to see what each person in the group is supposed to be doing at any particular time.
I think that the CADMOS learning design could have been useful for expressing my learning design from activity one. The idea of ‘swim lanes’ to illustrate the different roles would certainly have been useful, particularly as there was two educators delivering the session. Also, the students could have been split into different groups and been given different paths depending on their level of expertise with the VLE system. The conceptual model part however would have been too complicated. In the VLE session I delivered there were lots of different resources and tools needed and the conceptual model chart might have got very complicated and large with all the resources indicated on it. There also seems to be only 1 resource for each activity, whether this is a limitation of the CADMOS system or something that simply wasn’t shown is unclear but it would not have been ideal for the VLE Session.
The 4TS model appears to be a visual representation of the traditional lesson plan used by many teachers. The lesson/session is split into Tasks, Teams, Technology and Time and then represented using a flow diagram to show how the 4Ts integrate and associate with each other.
It took me a bit of time to understand this approach but once I had linked it to my view of a traditional lesson plan it became much clearer. I think the word technology is a bit confusing, or could be for some people where it simply indicates the resources and materials needed for the lesson (they had to keep within their 4T acronym).
When delivering the VLE session I described in lesson 1 there was a lot of student led activities. What this meant was that the facilitators would present and demonstrate an idea and then the students would be able to practice and play around developing that idea. For example, one activity was to create a VLE based quiz, so some students simply used multiple choice questions (the easiest kind to create) and others quickly went beyond this and were trying to incorporate complex questions that included diagrams and animations or free form answered questions. |I am not sure that the 4T model would have easily allowed me to model this.
The authors do mention that the 4T model could model optional tasks by splitting the Task lane into two but again I think that this would add complexity and confuse the clear and tidy approach that this learning design offers.
The main benefits of using these designs for my activity would be as a map through the lesson, with a little tweaking they both would have been very useful as a sheet to use in the session to track the progress of the lesson or to display (in a simplified form) for the students so they could see where they were up to.