Characterizing the most general temporal constraint

This paper introduces a characterization of the so-called most general temporal constraint (GTC), which guarantees the common-sense assertion that "the beginning of the effect cannot precede the beginning of the cause". The formalism is based on general time theory which takes both points and intervals as primitive. It is shown that there are in fact 8 possible causal relationships which satisfy GTC, including cases where, on the one hand, effects start simultaneously with, during, immediately after, or some time after their causes, and on the other hand, events end before, simultaneously with, or after their causes. These causal relationships are versatile enough to subsume those representatives in the literature.

The completeness and soundness of temporal theories

Generally speaking, the term temporal logic refers to any system of rules and symbolism for representing and reasoning about propositions qualified in terms of time. In computer science, particularly in the domain of Artificial Intelligence, there are mainly two known approaches to the representation of temporal information: modal logic approaches including tense logic and hybrid temporal logic, and predicate logic approaches including temporal arguement method and reified temporal logic. On one hand, while tense logic, hybrid temporal logic and temporal argument method enjoy formal theoretical foundations, their expressiveness has been criticised as not power enough for representing general temporal knowledge; on the other hand, although reified temporal logic provides greater expressive power, most of the current systems following the temporal reification lack of complete and sound axiomatic theories. With there observations in mind, a new reified temporal logic with clear syntax and semantics in terms of a sound and complete axiomatic formalism is introduced in this paper, which retains all the expressive power of temporal reification.

"Practise what we preach": a social constructivist approach to blended learning

This presentation reports on the formal evaluation, through questionnaires, of a new Level 1 undergraduate course, for 130 student teachers, that uses blended learning. The course design seeks to radicalise the department’s approach to teaching, learning and assessment and use students as change agents. Its structure and content, model social constructivist approaches to learning. Building on the student’s experiences of and, reflections on, previous learning, promotes further learning through the support of “able others” (Vygotsky 1978), facilitating and nurturing a secure community of practice for students new to higher education. The course’s design incorporates individual, paired, small and large group activities and exploits online video, audio and text materials. Course units begin and end with face-to-face tutor-led activities. Online elements, including discussions and formative submissions, are tutor-mediated. Students work together face-to-face and online to read articles, write reflections, develop presentations, research and share experiences and resources. Summative joint assignments and peer assessments emphasise the value of collaboration and teamwork for academic, personal and professional development. Initial informal findings are positive, indicating that students have engaged readily with course content and structure, with few reporting difficulties accessing or using technology. Students have welcomed the opportunity to work together to tackle readings in a new genre, pilot presentation skills and receive and give constructive feedback to peers. Course tutors have indicated that depth and quality of study are evident, with regular online formative submissions enabling tutors to identify and engage directly with student’s needs, provide feedback and develop appropriately designed distance and face-to-face teaching materials. Pastoral tutors have indicated that students have reported non-engagement of peers, leading to the rapid application of academic or personal support. Outcomes of the formal evaluation will inform the development of Level 2 and 3 courses and influence the department’s use of blended learning.

Exploration of the student experience of e-learning: beginning to bridge the learning divide

Introduction This proposal aims, through debate within symposium to explore the student experience of e-learning. The team facilitating the discussion will draw upon their experience of an HEA funded pathfinder project, the main aim of which was to collect learner stories about their experience of using technology in their everyday learning activities at the University of Greenwich across a range of programmes, levels, locations and student groups. Method The project design responded to the growing body of student voice literature and then utilised and built upon the JISC-funded studies that focussed on understanding the learner perspectives on the role of technology in learning, namely: • the LEX study which investigated a broad spectrum of technology use by eliciting rich data about learners’ feelings, beliefs and intentions towards e-learning (Creanor et al, 2006); • the LXP studies which explored disciplinary differences in uses of technology by university students through a variety of methodologies (Conole et al, 2006). Results The symposium will be organised as a round table discussion that will be structured into three sections: • Designing an online survey tool, and the results of our survey. • Exploring student stories. • What can learned from the project and taking the findings back to enhance learning. To stimulate discussion each section will start by asking the participants to discuss and debate a particular question, this will be followed by an interactive presentation by the respective member of the project team who will share the findings of the project and invite contributions to the resulting discussion from personal perspectives. The questions are: • What is effective learning within a context of digital technology? • What are the myths and truths about the identity of today's learners? • What practical changes need to happen in order to see real change? Conclusion The final section of the symposium will invite contributions from the participants in order to collate the views and perspectives of all the participants in order to focus the discussion on the following: • The issues that have arisen as a result of the round table debates. • New speculative approaches to enhancing the student experience. • A controversial stand to the future of Higher Education teaching and learning and the role and integration of technology within that education. The symposium will provide an opportunity to explore the predictive value of Student Experience of E-Learning Laboratory (SEEL) project.

Experts on e-learning: insights gained from listening to the student voice!

The Student Experience of e-Learning Laboratory (SEEL) project at the University of Greenwich was designed to explore and then implement a number of approaches to investigate learners’ experiences of using technology to support their learning. In this paper members of the SEEL team present initial findings from a University-wide survey of nearly a 1000 students. A selection of 90 ‘cameos’, drawn from the survey data, offer further insights into personal perceptions of e-learning and illustrate the diversity of students experiences. The cameos provide a more coherent picture of individual student experience based on the totality of each person’s responses to the questionnaire. Finally, extracts from follow-up case studies, based on interviews with a small number of students, allow us to ‘hear’ the student voice more clearly. Issues arising from an analysis of the data include student preferences for communication and social networking tools, views on the ‘smartness’ of their tutors’ uses of technology and perceptions of the value of e-learning. A primary finding and the focus of this paper, is that students effectively arrive at their own individualised selection, configuration and use of technologies and software that meets their perceived needs. This ‘personalisation’ does not imply that such configurations are the most efficient, nor does it automatically suggest that effective learning is occurring. SEEL reminds us that learners are individuals, who approach learning both with and without technology in their own distinctive ways. Hearing, understanding and responding to the student voice is fundamental in maximising learning effectiveness. Institutions should consider actively developing the capacity of academic staff to advise students on the usefulness of particular online tools and resources in support of learning and consider the potential benefits of building on what students already use in their everyday lives. Given the widespread perception that students tend to be ‘digital natives’ and academic staff ‘digital immigrants’ (Prensky, 2001), this could represent a considerable cultural challenge.

Student Experience of E-Learning (SEEL)

The Student Experience of E-Learning project (SEEL) was an institutional response to the university’s HEA/JISC Benchmarking exercise (Ryan and Kandler, 2007). The study had a social constructivist approach which recognised the importance of listening to the student voice (JISC 2007) within the University of Greenwich context, to interpret the student experience of e-learning. Nearly 1000 students responded to an online survey on their approaches to, and their use of, learning technology. The quantitative and qualitative questions used included identifying study patterns, using specific online tools, within the context of learning and beyond, and student’s attitudes towards using e-learning in their studies. Initially, individual responses to questions were analysed in depth, giving a general indication of the student experience. Further depth was applied through a filtering mechanism, beginning with a cross-slicing of individual student responses to produce cameos. Audio logs and individual interviews were drawn from these cameos. Analysis of the cameos is in progress but has already revealed some unexpected results. There was a mismatch between students’ expectations of the university’s use of technology and their experiences and awareness of its possible use in other contexts. Students recognised the importance of social interaction as a vehicle for learning (Vygotsky 1978, Bruner 2006) but expressed polarised views on the use of social networking sites such as Facebook for e-learning. Their experiences in commercial contexts led them to see the university VLE as unimaginative and the tutors’ use of it as lacking in vision. Whereas analysis of the individual questions provided a limited picture, the cameos gave a truer reflection of the students lived experiences and identified a gulf between the university’s provision and the students’ expectation of e-learning and their customary use of technology. However it is recognised that the very nature of an online survey necessarily excludes students who chose not to engage, either through lack of skills or through disillusionment and this would constitute a separate area for study.