Embedding Pedagogical Principles and Theories into Design Patterns

The design of e-learning courseware is a careful balancing act between pedagogy and technology, often at the expense of pedagogy(Neal & Miller, 2005). Experts at teaching in their field are not necessarily experts at mapping classroom teaching into the online domain (Vrasidas, 2004). One way of aiding e-learning design has been to create pattern languages, as design patterns and pedagogical patterns. Pedagogical patterns address teaching practices, but not the design of e-learning courseware. Current design patterns for e-learning courseware do not expicitly state why pedagogical theories and practices are selective to certain pattern language structures and design solutions. One such language based on a hierarchical design analysis model (Retalis, Georgiakakis, & Dimitriadis, 2006) takes a design gaze clearly positioned from principles of human-computer interaction design. The problem with the current practice of prioritizing usability over pedagogically-oriented environments is that the learning experience of the entire e-learning environment may be overlooked (Preece, Rogers, & Sharp, 2002). This is likely to compromise how learning materials are incorporated, the user-interface, modes of communication, collaboration spaces and so on. The environments may well be usable, but not achieve the pedagogical goals.


Introduction
The design of e-learning courseware is a careful balancing act between pedagogy and technology, often at the expense of pedagogy (Neal & Miller, 2005). Experts at teaching in their field are not necessarily experts at mapping classroom teaching into the online domain (Vrasidas, 2004). One way of aiding e-learning design has been to create pattern languages, as design patterns and pedagogical patterns. Pedagogical patterns address teaching practices, but not the design of e-learning courseware. Current design patterns for e-learning courseware do not expicitly state why pedagogical theories and practices are selective to certain pattern language structures and design solutions. One such language based on a hierarchical design analysis model (Retalis, Georgiakakis, & Dimitriadis, 2006) takes a design gaze clearly positioned from principles of human-computer interaction design. The problem with the current practice of prioritizing usability over pedagogically-oriented environments is that the learning experience of the entire e-learning environment may be overlooked (Preece, Rogers, & Sharp, 2002). This is likely to compromise how learning materials are incorporated, the user-interface, modes of communication, collaboration spaces and so on. The environments may well be usable, but not achieve the pedagogical goals.
Current practices in e-learning design pattern construction are problematic in cases where pedagogy is neither explicitly integrated into the pattern structure nor the pattern making process. In Alexander's pattern language (Alexander et al., 1977), architectural practice was examined to generate pattern solutions. Architecture is a field with thousands of years of practice from which to draw archetypal solutions; the same cannot be said for e-learning courseware. As such, our design for pedagogy patter making method combines evidence from best-practice examples and peer-review from the e-learning research literature to form a pedagogically-based pattern language. The method adapts the Alexandrian pattern structure to create patterns from which design solutions and pedagogical practices to accompany them can be realized.
To illustrate the methodology, we discuss the development of the design pattern EXPLORING KNOWLEDGE AND KNOWER STRUCTURES. This pattern aims to support designers in the development of an e-learning environment that addresses sociological issues related to the environment's own learning context and discipline. It suggests ways of incorporating strategies to support students in exploring the value structure of knowledge within a given discipline. This pattern, when used as the basis of the design of e-learning courseware, is expected to help learners to reflect about the 'implicit rules' of the discipline under study.

Mapping E-learning to Design Patterns
Designing an e-learning application is a particularly complex task. Design has been described as a "wicked" problem (Rittel & Webber, 1973)a problem involding numerous stakeholders with conflicting perspectives and that cannot be accurately modelled or addressed by the techniques of science and engineering. Wicked problems have multiple solutions which integrate multiple facets. One way to deal with wicked problems is to use design patterns. By breaking a set of design problems down into smaller integrated components, a pattern language provides a shared vocabulary for designers to capture and transmit the design process (Chan, 2003). Design patterns create core modules that are composed of smaller elements, but which are linked in an integrated way (Derntl & Motschnig-Pitrik, 2004).
The problem with the classic Alexandrian pattern structure is that when attempting to map pedagogical theories into an Alexandrian pattern, the focus moves away from design onto pedagogy. The pattern becomes an entirely pedagogical one. If the focus is maintained entirely on design there remains little scope within the pattern structure for including pedagogy. It becomes an either/or proposition. In order to create a pedagogically-based design pattern it is first necessary to adapt Alexander's pattern structure.
One way to adapt the pattern language is to modify Alexander's notion of hierarchy. Although Alexander's pattern language dealt with architectural design and town planning, the hierarchy of large-to-small elements can be loosely mapped onto the structure of elearning systems (see Figure 1). In this case, the elements are the curricular and disciplinary context, the first four boxes of Figure 1, within which teaching and learning take place, and then the visual and interaction design elements needed to realize any elearning courseware.
The organizing principle for this mapping is performativity of languages of design (Dong, 2007). Under this perspective, any language of design must be comprised of coherent elements (aggregation), principles of re-contextualization (accumulation), and principles of selection (appraisal). Applying the design pattern enacts the principles of selection. Principles of re-contextualization operate when realizing the elements into a new design. These principles are embodied in the connectivity and hierarchy between elements.
The realization of a resource depends on two factors: the functional characteristics and structural consequences from resources at the next level up (a vertical relation); and, the context in which the e-learning system is being developed (a horizontal relation). Likewise, an individual pattern is difficult to evaluate on its own; it is deployed within the context of the patterns that support and surround it (Alexander et al., 1977). The connectivity between patterns is outlined in the pattern structure created by Alexander, as can be seen in Figure 2. In his structure the introductory paragraph and the concluding paragraph tie each individual pattern into the entire design pattern language to A picture (showing an archetypal example of the pattern) An introductory paragraph setting the context for the pattern (explaining how it helps to complete some larger patterns)  (to mark the beginning of the problem) A headline, in bold type, to give the essence of the problem in one or two sentences The body of the problem The solution, in bold type. This is the heart of the patternthe field of physical and social relationships which are required to solve the stated problem in the stated context. Always stated as an instruction, so that you know what to do to build the pattern.
A diagrammatic representation of the solution  (to show the main body of the pattern is finished) A paragraph tying the pattern to the smaller patterns which are needed to complete and embellish it.
give consideration to the links and relationships between the patterns.
This mapping forms the foundation of a strategy for the creation of a pedagogically-based design pattern language for e-learning. The structure of the pattern language needs to encompass and reference the larger and smaller patterns and clearly show the links between individual patterns, allowing complex and multiple relationships between them. In this way users can create their own pathways through the pattern language, enabling them to use whichever patterns suit their particular needs. Writing a pattern language is done on two levels, looking at the detail of the pattern itself and its relationship to those that surround ita bottom up and top down approach at the same time (Alexander et al., 1977;Goodyear, 2004).
Pedagogy is less amenable (than the visual and interactive elements needed to realized an elearning system) to the one-to-one mapping of Alexander's language of physical space. Goodyear (2004) says that: What would be the largest pattern, equivalent to Alexander's 'Independent region'? I suspect it would be a course, or Programme of study. This is the largest entity which can be designed. At smaller scale levels there are the building blocks of a course, however one labels them in one's own system or institution -Study unit, Module, etc. Then there are the kinds of pedagogical technique catalogued by Paulsen: Discussion group, Debate, etc. Within these are smaller pedagogical tactics (tasks), smaller organisational forms, as well as the tools and artefacts with which we populate the learning space.
However, neither the structure nor the content of an Alexandrian pattern contain sufficient elements to accommodate pedagogical practices. As well as the design solution, the pedagogical practices that accompany the solution need to be incorporated, along with higher level pedagogical issues. Goodyear (2005) describes these as the "pedagogical framework" that helps define the educational problem space. He conceptualises the educational problem space as having two layers of tasks (see Figure 3).

Goodyear's (2005) pedagogical framework considers:
 pedagogical philosophy (a set of beliefs on how we think people learn, what knowledge consists of, how we think people should be treated)  high level pedagogy (broad approaches such as problem-based learning, cognitive apprenticeship, collaborative knowledge building)  pedagogical strategy (directly related to action, e.g. the use of an online debate)  pedagogical tactics (the detailed methods we use to set tasks for students, encourage their participation, offer guidance and feedback). The second adaptation of the Alexandrian structure is to embed a pedagogic philosophy at the top of the pattern structure. When a design for pedagogy pattern is written according to one or more learning theories, these theories frame both the problem formulation and the solutions presented. This informs the high level pedagogy of each learning solution and the strategy and pedagogical tactics are therefore created in accordance with these teaching theories. Based on these adaptations, we claim that a design for pedagogy pattern must:  show the relationships between pedagogic strategies associated with the individual design elements and those associated with the ways of thinking about education  enact the educational context of the learning topic  inform the relevant teaching practices of the instructors, and the tactics for engaging students.
The learning theories, their application and reasons for their use in the sample pattern will be examined in detail in the next section.

Applying Pedagogical Theories to E-learning
E-learning should not depend simply on delivery of content, but should provide a satisfying learning experience for the student. Our definition of a 'satisfying learning experience' includes observing, reflecting on those observations, constructing new knowledge, creating theories based on this new knowledge and putting those theories into practice. It also involves socializing with other students and interacting with peers, scholars and tutors in an environment that is easy to move around in and that encourages interactionwith the materials themselves and with other people.
Interaction in e-learning applications must therefore be examined not only in terms of actions toward teaching and learning, but also in terms of interactions congruent with teaching strategies, or how they are to be used within the learning context. Design for e-learning therefore needs to be informed not only by theories of learning, but also the pedagogies that apply to those theories and how they impact upon instructional design and practice (Adams et al., 1996). Our work draws on constructivism and experiential learning theories, as these theories offer instruction-based ways to conceptualize what type of interactions should take place between the learner and the materials.

Constructivism
Constructivism sees learning as an active process in which, through interaction with materials, the learner makes links between the materials and prior knowledge (Ardito et al., 2004). Taking an epistemological perspective, constructivism is concerned with how we know and how we develop meaning. This process has to be internal to the learner, by integrating knowledge into pre-existing schemes (assimilation) or by changing the existing schemes to fit the new environment (accommodation) (Young & Collin, 2004). In order to be effective, a task must be included in an actual and collaborative context. This allows learners to understand the motivation and the final goal of the task itself, but also to incorporate other learner's opinions (Ardito et al., 2004).
Learning, according to the social constructivist approach, occurs not only with the student's interaction with the learning materials, but also with the teacher and with the student's peers, the community of scholars and like-minded students. Knowledge and social interaction go together (Dalgarno, 2002;Young & Collin, 2004). Learners construct their knowledge from these interactions. Fellow students take on a number of roles, they are not only authors and presenters, but also peers, reviewers and active listeners (Derntl & Motschnig-Pitrik, 2004). Learning through guided discovery promotes active reflection in both student and teacher. In distance education these interactions between student and teacher and fellow students are limited, often to the detriment of learning (Fabri & Gerharo, 2000).
Each person has a representation of knowledge. Learning occurs when a gap occurs in the learner's knowledge, or an inconsistency arises between their knowledge representation and experience (Dalgarno, 2002). Learners serve a cognitive apprenticeship, which should be dealt with by employing six teaching methods: modelling, coaching, scaffolding, articulation, reflection and exploration. Modelling (by the teacher) and observation and imitation (by the learner) promote the initial acquisition of cognitive and metacognitive skills. In practicing their skills, students need coaching and scaffolding from the teacher. Articulation and reflection allow students to think abou their problem solving and, finally, exploration leads to learner autonomy and problem formulation (Chee, 2004).
Based on these constructivist concepts, we identified a number of general interaction design principles when applying constructivist approaches to e-learning design:  Given a choice of interactive materials, choose one that allows interactions with realworld examples. Simulations are one example.
 Design for collaboration and ease of access to collaborative tools, both on menus and through links within the content. Assign tasks that involve collaboration.
 Help a community of scholars to organize and allow socialization as well as on-topic communication. Use tools such as bulletin boards, chat and social facilities.
 Promote learning through guided discovery. This can be achieved with highly interactive exercises using tools such as Adobe Flash.
 Support tutor to student contact to allow mentoring, scaffolding and coaching. This can be on a public facing tool or privately via messaging, Skype, or e-mail.

Experiential learning
Learning is regarded as a process and should not be seen in terms of outcomes, or constant, fixed elements of thought. Experiential learning theory stems from a set of assumptions that ideas are not fixed, but are constantly being reformed through experience.
Learning is the "process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience" (Kolb, 1984, p.38). Experience is always modifying thoughts, and that is why no two thoughts are ever the sameexperience always intervenes. Learning is, by its very nature, a "tension and conflict filled process". Kolb (1984) proposes that effective learners should have four different kinds of abilities; concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization and active experimentation (see Figure 4).
In experiential learning theory the relationship between learner and the environment is symbolized in the dual meaning of the word experience. One meaning is subjective and personal, as in "I have experienced great joy", the other is objective, as in "She has 20 years' experience in her job". These two meanings interact in complex waysevery experience is at the same time subjective and objective (Kolb, 1984). The word interaction, according to Dewey (1938) assigns equal rights to both objective and subjective meanings of experience. Therefore, a learning experience cannot be divorced from its environmentthe layers of meaning are intertwined. Kolb (1984) states that there are two distinct modes of grasping experience -comprehension and apprehension. Apprehension is the environment's input into a person's sense of situatedness. It is effortless -apprehended with "no need for rational enquiry or analytical confirmation" (Kolb, 1984, p.43). Kolb (1984) states that: Through comprehension we introduce order into what would otherwise be a seamless, unpredictable flow of apprehended sensations, but at the price of shaping (distorting) and forever changing that flow (p.43).
Apprehension disappears as soon as you change your situation. The comprehension of the experience allows you to transmit that knowledge in the form of a model of that situation, to others (Kolb, 1984). It is here that we begin to understand the importance of the environment that encapsulates learning. The comprehension of learning materials is a way in which the learner orders what he or she has apprehended. The apprehension and the subsequent comprehension that the environment affords is key. Unlike other learning theorists, Kolb places equal importance on apprehension and comprehension in the learning process.
A "trying out" or experience-based approach is at the core of Kolb's experiential learning theory, and if encapsulated in a collaborative learning space provides the real-world context outlined in social constructivist theory.
E-learning provides the unique opportunity to cater for learners who transform their knowledge via intention (the more reflective type of learner) and for those who transform via extension (those who jump into a learning activity and are able to cope with mistakes). Those who transform their learning via intention need time to contemplate the theories and information given, to be certain of their thinking before they commence a learning activity. Because much of e-learning is not subject to time constraints these learners are able to spend the time they need to assimilate the knowledge enough to be confident when undertaking a learning activity. Similarly those who "transform via extension" can do so as the interactive  (1984, p.42) nature of e-learning allows them to skip ahead to engage in the interactive activity before returning to additional materials as needed.
The interaction design principles arising out of experiential learning theory that can be applied to e-learning are as follows:  Create interactive learning exercises incorporating all four aspects of Kolb's learning cycle to cater to all types of learners. Allow ease of switching (e.g., through navigation) between them.
 Use visual cues and textual cues to allow apprehension with the learning environment. 3D environments such as Active World or Second Life provide a rich designed environment to make use of apprehension.
 Create exercises where learners can "try out" their new knowledge.
 Cater for both reflective users and those who like to jump straight in to the exercises, and create easy navigation between the different areas.

Design for Pedagogy Pattern Making Method
In summary, a design for pedagogy pattern uses the adapted Alexander pattern structure to include the two pedagogical theories and to accommodate Goodyear's pedagogical framework (see Figure 5). The differences between this pattern structure and that of Alexander are as follows:  The picture of the archetypal example of the pattern becomes optional, because pedagogy does not always lend itself to visual representations (Goodyear, 2004; though see also Derntl & Motsching-Pitrik, this volume).
 The solution is explained in terms of how it relates to learning theories such as constructivism and experiential learning.
 Teaching strategies discuss pedagogical theories to accompany the e-learning courseware designed based on the pattern.
 Solutions that do not map to the constructivist and experiential learning theories may be used in the optional 'consider these other solutions' section.
 Case studies are included within the pattern as a sidebar so that novice users can understand how the pattern is used in context, while experienced users can omit them (Clancy & Linn, 1999).

Figure 5. Design pattern structure based on pedagogy.
With the pattern structure in place, the design for pedagogy pattern making method proceeds as follows: Peer-reviewed text search or identification of pattern problem. Taking the overall pattern language structure from Figure 1 as a guide, the creator of the pattern identifies the problem to be solved by the pattern, working from larger to smaller components and taking into account Goodyear's pedagogical issues (see e.g. Goodyear, 2005).

Definition of problem.
Based on the search of existing literature and e-learning courseware, the e-learning design and pedagogy problem is defined.

Literature search for solution.
A solution search is commenced, looking for solutions that fit with constructivist and experiential learning theories or alternatively identifying solutions based on other pedagogical theories. Additionally, the pattern writer looks for case studies and teaching strategies, within peer-reviewed articles in conjunction with a critical examination of existing e-learning courseware.

Identify generic elements
Existing e-learning courseware is examined; interaction and visual design and pedagogical elements are identified. These generic elements are noted, for example, on index cards, and organized into a hierarchy, like a flow chart, for each courseware example. Elements that appear in the same spatial area in the courseware should be at the same level of the hierarchy. For example, if a threaded discussion is closely associated spatially with a teaching practice, they would be at the same level. In this way a hierarchy is created with generic elements in it. This is recorded and used to aid the writing of the design pattern document.

Solution in terms of constructivist and experiential learning theories.
Based on the identification of the elements and their hierarchical relationships, the pattern is written in terms of the pedagogical philosophies.
Basing the research on this process operationalizes the embedding of pedagogical theories into the design patterns. The aim here is to develop and refine the method for producing design patterns, not just to develop a pattern per se.

Pattern Background: The Sociology of Learning Within a Discipline
To illustrate the design for pedagogy pattern making process, we describe a pattern titled EXPLORING KNOWLEDGE AND KNOWER STRUCTURES. Structuring of knowledge refers to the arrangement of "knowledge" and "knowers" within intellectual and educational fields . The idea is that implicit agreements between members of a given field or discipline will form the basis for achievement and membership within the group. The theory assumes that the practice of professionals and educators reflects and shapes how knowledge and knowers (the people who possess, produce, valuate, and transmit the knowledge) are specialised in a given field or discipline. Therefore, the practice of professionals is realized according to their perceptions of what is being claimed as legitimate within their group. Membership in a discipline requires consequently that one is able to recognize what is implicitly being valued within the group, distinguishing what is considered legitimate practice within a discipline.

EXPLORING KNOWLEDGE AND KNOWER STRUCTURES
Context: This pattern supports students in their investigation and reflection on what counts as 'relevant practice' within a disciplinary group or field. The pattern is concerned with how the application design may incorporate a space, with materials and strategies, to stimulate students' reflection and investigation of the social structuring of a discipline. This pattern complements DISCUSSION GROUPS and INTEGRATED COURSEWARE How does an e-learning designer build an environment that allows students to investigate/ probe/ explore/ check/ learn about the social structuring of knowledge and knowers of a given discipline?
In sociological terms, the student needs to recognize how knowledge and knowers (the people who possess, produce, valuate, and transmit the knowledge) are specialised within the discipline being studied. Whether this is a discipline about learning technical content, skills and procedures, or whether this is a discipline in which characteristics of the person, or who she or he is, is more important. , expanding Basil Bernstein's theory (1977), proposes the Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) as a framework to analyse the structuring of knowledge within fields. LCT considers that every practice or knowledge claim is made by 'someone' and it is about 'something'. Some disciplines may consider that what professionals know is more important than who they are. Anyone can potentially be a professional in such a discipline, as long as the person learns the theoretical content and skills to do the job. In other disciplines, however, greater emphasis is placed on personal characteristics of the professional, rather than technical content. Here being empathetic, having special sensitivity, an "eye for the job", being from a certain background etc, is more important than what theoretical framework the professional is using. These 'social rules' or 'values' regulate the practice of professionals and they will influence these professionals' understanding of what is considered special and genuine in his or her field. A novice entering the field needs to learn how to identify these values.
LCT states that knowledge claims and practices comprise of two relations: the epistemic relation to the object; and the social relation to the subject, author or actor. Different practices may emphasise these two relations differently, and as a result these relations may be represented as being stronger or weaker within a continuum of strengths. Therefore, knowledge can be seen as specialised by its epistemic relation, by its social relation, by both or neither, depending on its specific structure, which would vary depending on the field or discipline.
Based on these assumptions the e-learning designer may devise a space, with materials and strategies, to support students' reflection of which relations are being emphasized within a given field. Is this a discipline where what counts is what is known, or is this a discipline that emphasizes the experience and background of a person? Every practice will always contain both relations, the epistemic (e.g. technical content, skills) and social relations (e.g. characteristics of the professionals), but may emphasise those differently. Therefore the space, materials and strategies should always encompass both knowledge (based on the strengths of epistemic relations) and knower (based on the strengths of social relations) structures so that learners can probe what type of relations exist for their chosen profession.

Solution: Develop an environment in which students can investigate what is considered relevant within the discipline (the strengths of epistemic and social relations). Populate the environment with real-life examples of how knowledge and knowers are valued
within the discipline (e.g. clips of interviews with professionals, photos or examples of genuine work in the field, links to professional associations, links to conferences and seminars, relevant articles and publications in the field). By allowing a diverse range of materials, students will have an opportunity to explore this topic taking into account various perspectives, and construct their own theory of what is relevant within the discipline. Examples and activities should be supported by course material probing students reflection about what is being valued (e.g. provide students with a protocol to watch the interview or to read an article, invite a professional guest to contribute in a thematic forum about how one recognizes original work in the discipline). Activities should encourage insights into knowledge and knower structuring in the discipline, helping students in identifying the implicit values: is this discipline valuing the application of technical knowledge, or is it valuing how one experiences or feels about the object/product?


Teaching Strategies:

1) Social interaction via moderated discussion (with invited guests/speakers)
Moderated discussions may benefit from a guest 'appearance'. Warm the students up for the guest appearance by suggesting students research the topic beforehand (e.g. visiting websites of professional associations, or reading interviews with professionals). Organize initial discussions among the students, in which they can exchange their early theories about what counts as important within the discipline. Formulate a process that allows students access to a number of resources so that the discussion may be enriched with different views and perspectives.
Organise a professional guest who will present his or her views of how a particular field recognizes original work. The invited guest will provide a real-life aspect to students' construction of what is considered special within the discipline.
The exercise will provide students with opportunities to deepen their knowledge construction of the values of the discipline by exploring the topic in varied instances, as well as interaction with students and professionals and their perspectives of the topic.

2) Comprehension strategies
Use comprehension strategies (e.g. reading protocol, inquiry chart) to accompany reading material or watching of interview clips. Provide students with material that supports and scaffolds students' inquiry into what is considered important within a discipline.
For example, a reading protocol should prompt students with strategies they may use when trying to identify how the discipline is specialized (e.g. How does the professional describe genuine work in the discipline? Is there emphasis in the object per se? Is there emphasis in how one applies knowledge or techniques? Is there an emphasis on how one experiences the object? Is there any personal characteristics that are essential in this job?) Use a general inquiry chart to aggregate the gathering of the various sources (interviews, publications, websites from associations, etc). Generate questions whose answers will come from converging data obtained from the various sources. This may then be used as input for discussion in a discussion forum about the topic.

Consider these other patterns:
THE ROLE OF THE TUTOR, MODERATION and LINKING PATTERN