Journalisation dans un Programme de carrière en nouveaux médias : Le rôle de la réflexion par l’action

The purpose of this case study is to report on the use of learning journals as a strategy to encourage critical reflection in the field of graphic design. Very little empirical research has been published regarding the use of critical reflection in learning journals in this field. Furthermore, nothing has been documented at the college level. To that end, the goal of this research endeavor was to investigate whether second-year students in the NewMedia and Publication Design Program at a small Anglophone CEGEP in Québec, enrolled in a Page Layout and Design course, learn more deeply by reflecting in action during design projects or reflecting on action after completing design projects. Secondarily, indications of a possible change in self-efficacy were examined. Two hypotheses were posited: 1) reflection-on-action journaling will promote a deeper approach to learning than reflection-in-action journaling, and 2) the level of self-efficacy in graphic design improves as students are encouraged to think reflectively. Using both qualitative and quantitative methods, a mixed methods approach was used to collect and analyze the data. Content analysis of journal entries and interview responses was the primary method used to address the first hypothesis. Students were required to journal twice for each of three projects, once during the project and again one week after the project had been submitted. In addition, data regarding the students' perception of journaling was obtained through administering a survey and conducting interviews. For the second hypothesis, quantitative methods were used through the use of two surveys, one administered early in the Fall 2011 semester and the second administered early in the Winter 2012 semester. Supplementary data regarding self-efficacy was obtained in the form of content analysis of journal entries and interviews. Coded journal entries firmly supported the hypothesis that reflection-on-action journaling promotes deep learning. Using a taxonomy developed by Kember et al. (1999) wherein "critical reflection" is considered the highest level of reflection, it was found that only 5% of the coded responses in the reflection-in-action journals were deemed of the highest level, whereas 39% were considered critical reflection in the reflection-on-action journals. The findings from the interviews suggest that students had some initial concerns about the value of journaling, but these concerns were later dismissed as students learned that journaling was a valuable tool that helped them reflect and learn. All participants indicated that journaling changed their learning processes as they thought much more about what they were doing while they were doing it. They were taking the learning they had acquired and thinking about how they would apply it to new projects; this is critical reflection. The survey findings did not support the conclusive results of the comparison of journal instruments, where an increase of 35% in critical reflection was noted in the reflection-on-action journals. In Chapter 5, reasons for this incongruence are explored. Furthermore, based on the journals, surveys, and interviews, there is not enough evidence at this time to support the hypothesis that self-efficacy improves when students are encouraged to think reflectively. It could be hypothesized, however, that one's self-efficacy does not change in such a short period of time. In conclusion, the findings established in this case study make a practical contribution to the literature concerning the promotion of deep learning in the field of graphic design, as this researcher's hypothesis was supported that reflection-on-action journaling promoted deeper learning than reflection-in-action journaling. When examining the increases in critical reflection from reflection-in-action to the reflection-on-action journals, it was found that all students but one showed an increase in critical reflection in reflection-on-action journals. It is therefore recommended that production-oriented program instructors consider integrating reflection-on-action journaling into their courses where projects are given.

The Effect of using online homework exercises on student achievement in a Quantitative methods course

Abstract: Quantitative Methods (QM) is a compulsory course in the Social Science program in CEGEP. Many QM instructors assign a number of homework exercises to give students the opportunity to practice the statistical methods, which enhances their learning. However, traditional written exercises have two significant disadvantages. The first is that the feedback process is often very slow. The second disadvantage is that written exercises can generate a large amount of correcting for the instructor. WeBWorK is an open-source system that allows instructors to write exercises which students answer online. Although originally designed to write exercises for math and science students, WeBWorK programming allows for the creation of a variety of questions which can be used in the Quantitative Methods course. Because many statistical exercises generate objective and quantitative answers, the system is able to instantly assess students’ responses and tell them whether they are right or wrong. This immediate feedback has been shown to be theoretically conducive to positive learning outcomes. In addition, the system can be set up to allow students to re-try the problem if they got it wrong. This has benefits both in terms of student motivation and reinforcing learning. Through the use of a quasi-experiment, this research project measured and analysed the effects of using WeBWorK exercises in the Quantitative Methods course at Vanier College. Three specific research questions were addressed. First, we looked at whether students who did the WeBWorK exercises got better grades than students who did written exercises. Second, we looked at whether students who completed more of the WeBWorK exercises got better grades than students who completed fewer of the WeBWorK exercises. Finally, we used a self-report survey to find out what students’ perceptions and opinions were of the WeBWorK and the written exercises. For the first research question, a crossover design was used in order to compare whether the group that did WeBWorK problems during one unit would score significantly higher on that unit test than the other group that did the written problems. We found no significant difference in grades between students who did the WeBWorK exercises and students who did the written exercises. The second research question looked at whether students who completed more of the WeBWorK exercises would get significantly higher grades than students who completed fewer of the WeBWorK exercises. The straight-line relationship between number of WeBWorK exercises completed and grades was positive in both groups. However, the correlation coefficients for these two variables showed no real pattern. Our third research question was investigated by using a survey to elicit students’ perceptions and opinions regarding the WeBWorK and written exercises. Students reported no difference in the amount of effort put into completing each type of exercise. Students were also asked to rate each type of exercise along six dimensions and a composite score was calculated. Overall, students gave a significantly higher score to the written exercises, and reported that they found the written exercises were better for understanding the basic statistical concepts and for learning the basic statistical methods. However, when presented with the choice of having only written or only WeBWorK exercises, slightly more students preferred or strongly preferred having only WeBWorK exercises. The results of this research suggest that the advantages of using WeBWorK to teach Quantitative Methods are variable. The WeBWorK system offers immediate feedback, which often seems to motivate students to try again if they do not have the correct answer. However, this does not necessarily translate into better performance on the written tests and on the final exam. What has been learned is that the WeBWorK system can be used by interested instructors to enhance student learning in the Quantitative Methods course. Further research may examine more specifically how this system can be used more effectively.