Personal learning artefacts: persistence, ownership and privacy

Traditional classrooms have been often regarded as closed spaces within which experimentation, discussion and exploration of ideas occur. Professors have been used to being able to express ideas frankly, and occasionally rashly while discussions are ephemeral and conventional student work is submitted, graded and often shredded. However, digital tools have transformed the nature of privacy. As we move towards the creation of life-long archives of our personal learning, we collect material created in various 'classrooms'. Some of these are public, and open, but others were created within 'circles of trust' with expectations of privacy and anonymity by learners. Taking the Creative Commons license as a starting point, this paper looks at what rights and expectations of privacy exist in learning environments? What methods might we use to define a 'privacy license' for learning? How should the privacy rights of learners be balanced with the need to encourage open learning and with the creation of eportfolios as evidence of learning? How might we define different learning spaces and the privacy rights associated with them? Which class activities are 'private' and closed to the class, which are open and what lies between? A limited set of set of metrics or zones is proposed, along the axes of private-public, anonymous-attributable and non-commercial-commercial to define learning spaces and the digital footprints created within them. The application of these not only to the artefacts which reflect learning, but to the learning spaces, and indeed to digital media more broadly are explored. The possibility that these might inform not only teaching practice but also grading rubrics in disciplines where public engagement is required will also be explored, along with the need for consideration by educational institutions of the data rights of students.

Using parent report to assess early lexical production in children exposed to more than one language

Limited expressive vocabulary skills in young children are considered to be the first warning signs of a potential Specific Language Impairment (SLI) (Ellis & Thal, 2008). In bilingual language learning environments, the expressive vocabulary size in each of the child’s developing languages is usually smaller compared to the number of words produced by monolingual peers (e.g. De Houwer, 2009). Nonetheless, evidence shows children’s total productive lexicon size across both languages to be comparable to monolingual peers’ vocabularies (e.g. Pearson et al., 1993; Pearson & Fernandez, 1994). Since there is limited knowledge as to which level of bilingual vocabulary size should be considered as a risk factor for SLI, the effects of bilingualism and language-learning difficulties on early lexical production are often confounded. The compilation of profiles for early vocabulary production in children exposed to more than one language, and their comparison across language pairs, should enable more accurate identification of vocabulary delays that signal a risk for SLI in bilingual populations. These considerations prompted the design of a methodology for assessing early expressive vocabulary in children exposed to more than one language, which is described in the present chapter. The implementation of this methodological framework is then outlined by presenting the design of a study that measured the productive lexicons of children aged 24-36 months who were exposed to different language pairs, namely Maltese and English, Irish and English, Polish and English, French and Portuguese, Turkish and German as well as English and Hebrew. These studies were designed and coordinated in COST Action IS0804 Working Group 3 (WG3) and will be described in detail in a series of subsequent publications. Expressive vocabulary size was measured through parental report, by employing the vocabulary checklist of the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventory: Words and Sentences (CDI: WS) (Fenson et al., 1993, 2007) and its adaptations to the participants’ languages. Here we describe the novelty of the study’s methodological design, which lies in its attempt to harmonize the use of vocabulary checklist adaptations, together with parental questionnaires addressing language exposure and developmental history, across participant groups characterized by different language exposure variables. This chapter outlines the various methodological considerations that paved the way for meaningful cross-linguistic comparison of the participants’ expressive lexicon sizes. In so doing, it hopes to provide a template for and encourage further research directed at establishing a threshold for SLI risk in children exposed to more than one language.