We research the features of Personal Learning Environment: first-year students’ projects
There are several things we like to talk about. One of these is the projects and research of students that they conduct at the Laboratory. We especially like when students can share the result of such projects with each other and with others. That is why we regularly hold local conferences of various sizes and formats.
It seems to us important to organise such events for students from the very first year. The conference or poster session completes the cycle of preparing their own research – from the discussion of fundamental questions to the collection of empirical materials and, finally, the protection of the obtained results. Public speaking is also a good way to reflect on the work done, to hear or get answers to new questions, and perhaps to find like-minded people.
In today’s material we are pleased to report on the student conference “Education, Motivation and Personal Learning Environments” dedicated to the end of the field practice course. How was the preparation of first-year student projects organised? What difficulties did they face? What impressed students most?
Student conference “Education, motivation and Personal Learning Environments” was held on June 23. The first-year students presented the final projects, which they had been preparing together with СЛОН colleagues for two modules. The projects were devoted to the study of Individual Learning Environment peculiarities of students of 1-3 bachelor’s degree programs in Sociology and Political Science. The sample was impressive – it included more than 70 universities from 36 cities of Russia! In total, our students conducted 362 interviews.
How was it?
The whole third module was dedicated to the seminar's discussions on what is research and what is an Individual Learning Environment. At the same time, students comprehended its types and methods, learned to formulate research issues and hypotheses, considered the issues of ethics in research and in general got acquainted with the data analysis. Further an interview guide and a small questionnaire were developed.
In the 4th module, all 70 first-year students went to the field to collect data. Each student received the name of a university, from which he or she had to find informants through social networking services. The work was organised in the following way: participants uploaded the interview into a common archive. After the field phase, this archive was available to everyone, all young researchers had extensive material. Students split into teams and worked on the interview based on the research question posed. The proposed directions not only helped the students to get involved in the work, but also to look at their learning experience with some reflection and to learn certain ideas for their own life experience. The extensive work was finalised at the final conference.
What are the results?
Students shared their impressions about the conference and about all what happened to them during work on the projects.
Ksenia Vybornova : “Personally, I liked this conference very much! The preparation was, of course, difficult. Take interviews and become upset when potential respondents do not answer – an unpleasant experience. But all the downsides were covered by positive experience and communication with informants who responded. And I really liked the group work format when we came up with hypotheses, built a code tree several times. It was also very helpful that the teachers during the third module discussed with us how to formulate the research question correctly and how to code the interview. Moreover, it was very interesting that from literally one dataset many research questions were born, and these were studied by different project teams”.
Ivan Kuzmin: I liked the project. It was a great opportunity to try the role of researcher in the first studying year, as well as to receive comments on my work and help from teachers-practitioners. In the course of our work on the project, we collected data through interviews, then we formed groups and started analysing data and testing our hypotheses about data, and at the end we presented our project in front of the whole course and the jury. So in addition to improving our group and communication skills, we have also developed our storytelling skills to a larger audience. In addition, during the interview, I met many guys of my age from different places in Russia. I learned their experience of studying at the university (this was the subject of our interview), and basically how their “academic life” differs from ours. It was very interesting and useful for understanding how regions of our country differ in approach to learning, learning opportunities and so on”.
Alyona Chistyakova: Initially, the project seemed to me overextended and resource demanding. But in the end I understood that it had been a fascinating and invaluable experience because we learnt how to conduct interviews and assistants pointed out our mistakes. I like that this research included both individual and group formats of work — that is a rarity! This project for me was quite large because we met a lot of people from different universities. It is great that we were able to contribute to the study of the Individual Learning Environment of students at an early stage of our professional career!»
Polina Remezova has already helped our Laboratory, and we asked her to compare her experience of social research: «We interviewed students like us but from completely different universities and courses. In fact, it was very pleasant to communicate with them: the guys were talkative, and I learned a lot of interesting and new things for myself. And at the same time I helped to conduct research in our university. Talking about the differences with СЛОН research, they primarily relate to different objectives and formats. Thus, in the СЛОН research we mostly explored the motivation of school students in studying various subjects, using such methods as questionnaires, essay writing and testing. In our course, our goal was to find out how digital technologies were used to educate students, and the main way of collecting data was through interviews and subsequent analysis of the material.
Omitting all these terms, I would say that the experience in the two studies was completely different and in its own way interesting for me personally. In each of them, new characteristics of a researcher were revealed in me, and I got a cool experience. In general, despite the apparent differences, the two studies are similar. They are aimed at obtaining high-quality and reliable information, which is the main goal for me as a social researcher!»
Vladislav Kartasheva: Participation in the study was for me a challenge, in the process of which you understand the invaluable feature of the experience obtained. During studying the theory and making up questions for me, there were no difficulties, because it was an activity with which we already met. But at one point the phrase “tomorrow you will go out into the field” sounded, and the full seriousness of the project came to mind, even a little anxiety appeared. Surprisingly, it was easier to take interviews and analyse them than to find respondents, to get some reaction to the offer to participate in the study. However, the help always came from assistants and teachers who guided and gave good advice. Also, tight deadlines did not allow relaxing. Teamwork required a lot of time to agree on certain points regarding the project (especially in terms of data analysis), which added difficulties to the work process. Separately, I would like to highlight the unique experience of working with both qualitative and quantitative data. Thanks to the last one, I finally have a complete picture in my mind. The acquired knowledge in all disciplines was useful for our project, which helped to understand their interrelationship and practical applicability. In conclusion, I can say that this experience is not provided to all first-year students (according to the answers of our colleagues from other universities), but, in my opinion, it is necessary.»
Danil Gurin: « The field research project allowed me to immerse myself in a real applied case. I have been able to test myself in a variety of activities: interviewer, data analyst, researcher. Communication with university students from all corners of our big country helped to exchange experience in technology usage and learn about how the educational process in educational institutions is organised. In addition, the project helped many guys to overcome themselves and get out of comfort.»
Yesenia Gromyko: I liked the course and the project that we were able to successfully implement. When we knew the amount of work to be done, it was a little scary, but after the first interviews and analysis of mistakes, the excitement went away, we became more confident in our abilities. It was interesting to learn from students of other universities about the process of learning, some insights were new and surprising. I think that this project has helped to get deeper into what sociologists are doing, to put learned knowledge into practice, and to understand that you are doing something that is really important and useful.
New difficulties always accompany new experience. Our students had to deal with the lack of response from the informants, the postponement of meetings, and the necessity to maintain a conversation with strangers. These are not the easiest tasks, but students nailed it.