Creative Improvisations with Information and Communication Technology to Support Learning: A Conceptual and Developmental Framework

Year 2017, Volume: 6 Issue: 3, 229 - 250, 01.12.2017

Mikko Vesisenaho Patrick Dillon Sari Havu-nuutinen Tuula Nousiainen Teemu Valtonen Ruolan Wang

Abstract

This article is about facilitating collaborative, creative improvisations in learning with Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) and in so doing enhancing under-utilised creative possibilities in education and development in schools, universities, workplaces and in every-day life. Improvisation is defined and earlier research on supporting creative improvisations with ICT is outlined. There follows a conceptual framing where improvisation is seen as a creative outcome of certain cultural ecological interactions in learning environments. It is proposed that these creative improvisational interactions can be facilitated by ICT, and developmental ideas are presented. The purpose of the article is to review current practice and integrate it within an appropriate conceptual framework and thus outline a research and development agenda for future innovative work in the field

Keywords

Improvisation, Learning, Education, Creativity, Innovation

References

• Adams, A., Coughlan, T., Lea, J., Rogers, Y., Davies, S. & Collins, T. (2011). Design- ing interconnected distributed resources for collaborative inquiry based science education. In Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM Joint Conference on Digital Librar- ies (JCDL; pp. 395–396). ACM.
• Adams, A., Davies, S., Collins, T. & Rogers, Y. (2010). Out there and in here: design for blended scientific inquiry learning. In Proceedings of the 17th Association for Learning Technology Conference (ALT-C 2010). Retrieved from http://oro.open. ac.uk/27397/3/out_there_and_in_here.pdf 3.11.2017.
• Addessi, A. R. (2013). Child/machine interaction in reflexive environment. The MI- ROR platform. In R. Bresin (Ed.), Proceedings of the Sound and Music Comput- ing Conference 2013 (SMC2013; pp. 95–102). Berlin, Germany: Logos Verlag Berlin GmbH.
• Anagnostopoulou, C., Alexakis, A., & Triantafyllaki, A. (2012). A computational method for the analysis of musical improvisations by young children and psychi- atric patients with no musical background. In E. Cambouropoulos, C. Tsougras, P. Mavromatis, K. Pastiadis (Eds,), Proceedings of the 12th International Confer- ence on Music Perception and Cognition and the 8th Triennial Conference of the European Society for the Cognitive Sciences of Music (ICMPC and ESCOM; pp. 64–68). Retrieved from http://icmpc-escom2012.web.auth.gr/sites/default/files/ papers/64_Proc.pdf 3.11.2017
• Arrigo, M., Di Giuseppe, O., Fulantelli, G., Gentile, M., Merlo, G., Seta, L. & Taibi, D. (Eds.) (2010). MOTILL Mobile technologies in lifelong learning: Best prac- tices. Palermo, Italy: Italian National Research Council - Institute for Educational Technology. Retrieved from http://motill.eu/images/stories/motillbooklet_en.pdf 3.11.2017
• Barab, S. A. (2006). Design-based research: A methodological toolkit for the learning scientist. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sci- ences (pp. 153–169). New York, US: Cambridge University Press.
• Barab, S. & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting our stake in the ground. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1–14.
• Barrett, F.J. (1998). Creativity and improvisation in jazz and organizations: implica- tions for organizational learning. Organization Science, 9(5), 605–622.
• Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141– 178.
• Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.
• Cardoso de Araujo, R., & Addessi, A.R. (2012). A study about children’s musical im- provisation in an interactive reflexive musical context. Paper presented at the 30th ISME World Conference in Music Education, Thessaloniki, Greece. Retrieved from http://www.mirorproject.eu/content/docup/SimCam_CArdoso%20Addes- si,%202013.Definit.pdf 3.11.2017
• Clark, P. G. (2009). Reflecting on reflection in interprofessional education: Implica- tions for theory and practice. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 23(3), 213–223.
• Coker, J. (1964). Improvising jazz. New York, US: Simon & Schuster.
• Collins, A., Joseph, D. & Bielacsyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and meth- odological issues. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15–42.
• Conole, G., Wilson, T. McAndrew, P., Culver, J., Brasher, A. & Cross, S. (2009). New methods and approaches to the design and evaluation of open educational resourc- es. In Proceedings of EDEN Annual Conference 2009. Retrieved from http://oro. open.ac.uk/21131/1/olnet_workshop_abstract_final.pdf3.11.2017
• Coughlan, T., van der Linden, J. & Adams, A. (2012). Local connections: designing technologies for discovery and creativity within the community. Interactions, 19(1), 18-22.
• Crossan, M. M. & Sorrenti, M. (1997). Making sense of improvisation. Advances in Strategic Management, 14, 155–180.
• Cunha, M. P., Neves, P., Clegg, S. R., & Rego, A. (2015). Tales of the unexpected: Discussing improvisational learning. Management Learning, 46(5), 511–529.
• Davies, D., Jindal-Snape, D., Collier, C., Digby, R., Hay, P. & Howe, A. (2013) Crea- tive learning environments in education – A systematic literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 8, 80–91.
• Daele, A., Erpicum, M., Esnault, L., Pironet, F., Platteaux, H., Vandeput, E. & Van de Wiele, N. (2006). An example of participatory design methodology in a project which aims at developing individual and organisational learning in communities of practice. In E. Tomadaki and P. Scott (Eds.), Innovative approaches for learning and knowledge sharing 2006. Workshops proceedings (EC-TEL; pp. 272–277). Retrieved from http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-213/paper39.pdf 3.11.2017
• Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging para- digm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8.
• Dillon, P. (2008). Creativity, wisdom and trusteeship – niches of cultural production. In A. Craft, H. Gardner & G. Claxton (Eds.), Creativity and wisdom in education (pp.105–118). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Corwin Press.
• Dillon, P. (2012). Framing craft practice cultural ecologically: tradition, change and emerging agendas. In M. Ferris, (Ed), Making futures: The crafts as change- maker in sustainably aware cultures (pp. 72-78). Retrieved from https://www. researchgate.net/publication/283707901_Framing_craft_practice_cultural_eco- logically_tradition_change_and_emerging_agendas 3.11.2017
• Dillon, P. & Loi, D. (2008). Adaptive educational environments: theoretical develop- ments and educational applications. UNESCO Observatory Refereed E-Journal, 3.
• Dillon, P., Wang, R., Vesisenaho, M., Valtonen, T. & Havu-Nuutinen, S. (2013). Using technology to open up learning and teaching through improvisation: Case studies with micro-blogs and short message service communications. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 13–22.
• Erickson, F. (2011). Taking Advantage of Structure to Improvise in Instruction: Ex- amples from Elementary School Classrooms. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Structure and Improvisation in Creative Teaching (pp. 113–132). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Ferguson, R. (2012). Learning analytics: drivers, developments and challenges. Inter- national Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(5/6), 304–317
• Franklin, J. A. (2001). Learning and improvisation. In T. Dietterich, S. Becker, & S. Ghahramani (Eds.), Neural information processing systems, 14. Cambridge, MA, US: MIT Press. Retrieved from http://papers.nips.cc/paper/2079-improvisation- and-learning.pdf 3.11.2017
• Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by Doing: a guide to teaching and learning methods. Lon- don, UK: Further Education Unit.
• Gould, S.J.J., Furniss, D.J., Jennett, C.I., Wiseman, S., Iacovides, I. & Cox, A.L. (2014). MOODs: building massive open online diaries for researchers, teachers and contributors. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. In Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2014 (CHI EA ‘14; pp. 2281–2286). New York, US: ACM.
• Green, H., Facer, K., Rudd, T., Dillon, P & Humphreys, P. (2005). Personalisation and Digital Technologies. Bristol, UK: Futurelab. Retrieved from http://www.fu- turelab.org.uk/resources/documents/opening_education/Personalisation_report. pdf 3.11.2017
• Hamari, J. & Nousiainen, T. (2015). Why Do Teachers Use Game-Based Learning Technologies? The Role of Individual and Institutional ICT Readiness. In Pro- ceedings of the 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 682–691). Washington, DC, US: IEEE.
• Havu-Nuutinen, S., & Tahvanainen, S. (2013). D4.3 Country reports. Country report on the in-depth field work in Finland. Retrieved from http://www.creative-little- scientists.eu/sites/default/files/02_Country%20Report_Finland.pdf 3.11.2017
• Havu-Nuutinen, S. Fiqueras, K. Järvinen, H. Kontkanen, S. Kummunmäki, M. Pöntin- en, S. Räty-Zaborsky, Savolainen, R. & Valtonen, T. (2014). Children as creative natural scientists-ICT tools in early years’ science education. In H. Juuso, A.Lindt, M. Hasari, K. Kumpulainen, K-P. Lapinoja, P. Pirilä, S. Raappana & O. Tiainen, O. (eds.), Research-based school and teacher education (pp. 74–83). Publications of Finnish Teacher Training Schools.
• Holdhus, K., Hİisæter, S., Mæland, K., Vangsnes, V., Engelsen, K.S., Espeland, M. & Espeland, Å. (2016). Improvisation in teaching and education – roots and ap- plications, Cogent Education, 3(1). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/23311 86X.2016.1204142 3.11.2017
• Karampiperis, P., Koukourikos., A., & Panagopoulos G. (2014). Creative stories: A storytelling game fostering creativity. Paper presented at the 11th Internation- al Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA 2014), Porto, Portugal. Retrieved from http://cru.iit.demokritos.gr/sites/cru.iit. demokritos.gr/files/IC75.pdf 3.11.2017
• Kearney, C. (Ed). (2014) Keyconet’s conclusions and recommendations for strengthening key competence. Development in policy and practice. European Schoolnet. Retrieved from http://keyconet.eun.org/c/document_library/get_ file?uuid=78469b98-b49c-4e9a-a1ce-501199f7e8b3&groupId=11028 3.11.2017
• Keller, B., Jones, S., Thom, B. & Wolin, A. (2006). An interactive tool for learning improvisation through composition. Technical Report HMC-CS-2005-02. Harvey Mudd College. Retrieved from http://www.cs.hmc.edu/~keller/jazz/improvisor/ ImprovisorPaperRev04.pdf 3.11.2017
• King, J (1997). What Jazz is? An insider’s guide to understanding and listening to jazz. England: Penguin.
• Klobucar, T. (2008). iCamp Space – An environment for self-directed learning, col- laboration and social networking. WSEAS Transactions on Information Science and Applications, 5 (10), 1470–1479.
• Larman, C. (2004). Agile and iterative development: A manager’s guide. Boston, Ad- dison-Wesley.
• Lave, J. & E. Wenger (1991). Situated learning - Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Limanauskiene, V. & Stuikys. V. (2009). The enhancement of reusability of course content and scenarios in unified e-Learning environment for schools. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 7(2), 137-146. Retrieved from http://issuu.com/academic- conferences.org/docs/ejel-volume7-issue2-article148 3.11.2017
• Loi, D. & Dillon, P. (2006). Adaptive educational environments as creative spaces. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(3), 363–381.
• Lonka, K. (2015). Working document I. In European Parliament (Ed.), Innovative Schools: Teaching & Learning in the Digital Era – Workshop Documentation (pp. 5–46). Brussels: European Parliament. Retrieved from http://www.europarl. europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/563389/IPOL_STU(2015)563 3.11.2017
• Magni, M. & Maruping, L. (2013). Improvisation in working teams: how empowering leadership and overload matter. Human Resource Management, 52 (5), 715–739.
• Moorman, C. & Miner, A. (1998). Organizational improvisation and organizational memory. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 698–723.
• Montuori, A. (2003). The complexity of improvisation and the improvisation of com- plexity: Social science, art and creativity. Human Relations, 56(2), 237–255.
• Nguyen-Ngoc, A. V., & Law, E.L.-C. (2007). Evaluation of cross-cultural computer- supported collaborative learning: Preliminary findings for iCamp challenges. In C. Montgomerie & J. Seale (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2007 (pp. 1887–1896). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
• Nousiainen, T., Vesisenaho, M., & Eskelinen, P. (2015). “Let’s do this together and see what we can come up with ” : Teachers’ Views on Applying Game-based Peda- gogy in Meaningful Ways. eLearning Papers, 44, 74–84.
• Oddane, T. A. W. (2015). The collective creativity of academics and practitioners in in- novation projects. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 8(1), 33–57.
• Partnership for 21st Century Learning. (2015). P21 Framework Definitions. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/docs/P21_Framework_Definitions_ New_Logo_2015.pdf 3.11.2017
• Perteneder, F., Hahnwald, S., Haller, M. & Gaubinger, K. (2013). Systematic integra- tion of solution elements: How does digital creativity support change group dy- namics? In P. Kotzé, G. Marsden, G. Lindgaard, J. Wesson & M. Winckler (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2013, Proceedings, Part I, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 8117 (pp. 547–565). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
• Peters, G. (2009). The philosophy of improvisation. Chicago, US: Chicago University Press.
• Rikala, J., Hiltunen, L., & Vesisenaho, M. (2014). Teachers’ attitudes, competencies, and readiness to adopt mobile learning approaches. In Proceedings of 2014 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference 2014 (pp. 2529–2536). IEEE.
• Rogers, A. (2002). Learning and adult education. In R. Harrison, F. Reeve, A. Han- son, A. & J. Clarke (Eds.), Supporting lifelong learning (pp. 8–24). London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer / The Open University.
• Roth, W. (2005). Doing Qualitative Research: Praxis of Methods. Rotterdam, NL: Sense Publishers.
• Sandoval, W. A., & Bell, P. (2004). Design-based research methods for studying learn- ing in context: Introduction. Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 199–201.
• Sawyer, R.K. (2004). Creative teaching: collaborative discussion as disciplined im- provisation. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 12–20.
• Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2007). A theory of learning for the mobile age. In R. Andrews & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of E-Learning Research (pp. 221–247). London: Sage.
• Siemens, G., & Long, P. (2011). Penetrating the fog: Analytics in learning and educa- tion. Educause Review, 46(5), 30–32.
• So, H.-J., Kim, I., & Looi, C.-K. (2008). Seamless mobile learning: Possibilities and challenges arising from the Singapore experience. Educational Technology Inter- national, 9(2), 97–121.
• Stanton, G., & Ophoff, J. (2013). Towards a method for mobile learning design. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 10, 501–523.
• Sternberg, J. R. & Lubart I. T. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and para- digms. In J. Sternberg (ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3–16). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Sutinen, E. & Vesisenaho, M. (2006) Ethnocomputing in Tanzania: Design and anal- ysis of a contextualized ICT course. Research and Practice in Technology En- hanced Learning, 1(3), 239–267.
• Valtonen, T., Dillon, P., Hacklin, S. & Väisänen, P. (2010). Net generation at social software: challenging assumptions, clarifying relationships and raising implica- tions for learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 49(6), 210–219.
• van Rosmalen, P., Boon, J., Bitter-Rijpkema, M., Sie, R. & Sloep, P. (2014). Sup- porting co-creation with software, the idSpace platform. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 413–422.
• Vesisenaho, M. (2009). Developing contextualized ICT education. Case Tumaini Uni- versity, Tanzania. Köln, Germany: Lap Lambert Academic Publishing,
• Vesisenaho, M. & Dillon, P. (2009). Information and communication technology con- textualised in a cultural ecological view of learning. In Proceedings of the 39th Frontiers in Education conference (FIE 2009; pp. T4D1–5). St. Antonio, US: IEEE.
• Vesisenaho, M. & Dillon, P. (2013). Localizing and contextualizing information and communication technology in education: A cultural ecological framework. Peda- gogy, Culture & Society, 21(2), 239–259.
• Vesisenaho, M., Dillon, P. & Valtonen, T. (2011). Collaboratively constructed lecture notes. Does the process of construction promote improvisation in learning? In Proceedings of Koli calling international conference on computing education re- search (pp. 107–111). New York, US: ACM.
• Vesisenaho, M., Valtonen, T., Kukkonen, J., Havu-Nuutinen, S., Hartikainen, A. & Kärkkäinen, S. (2010). Blended learning with everyday technologies to activate students’ collaborative learning. Science Education International 12(4), 272–283.
• Voogt, J. & Pareja Roblin, N. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frame- works for 21st century competences: Implications for national curriculum poli- cies. Journal of Curriculum Studies 44(3), 299–321.
• Wang, F. & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5–23.
• WATCHME. (2014). WATCHME. Project summary. Retrieved from http://www.pro- ject-watchme.eu/aim-summary-and-components/ 3.11.2017
• Watson, W. R., Mong, C. J., & Harris, C. A. (2011). A case study in-class use of a video game for teaching high school history. Computers & Education, 56, 466–474.
• Wolff, A. & Zdenek, Z. (2012). Improving retention by identifying and supporting ‘‘at- risk’’ students. Educause Review Online. Retrieved from http://www.educause. edu/ero/article/improving-retention-identifying-and-supporting-risk-students 3.11.2017
• Xu,Y., Perteneder, F., Leong, J., Schwaiger, E.-M., & Haller, M. (2014). Using grid visualization to organize visual data. In Proceedings of the Second International Symposium of Chinese CHI (pp. 50–56). New York, NY, US: ACM.