In the CSLE+COVA Workshop for the Lamar University School of Education Teacher Education Workshop on July 25, 2018, we explored how:
We can make a more significant impact on our learners by giving them authentic learning opportunities to prepare them to thrive in the real world.
We can equip our learners to solve complex problems and realize their greatest potential when we give them choice, ownership, and a voice through these authentic learning opportunities.
ePortfolios can be leveraged to support these learning opportunities and to engage learners as they find their voice in sharing their creations.
The following books, videos, and methods were used or referred to in the workshop. You can access the workshop slide deck from – add link here
Workshop Videos
Please note that additional videos have been included that were not viewed in the workshop.
How to Fold a Shirt in Under 2 Seconds
CSLE+COVA Change in Focus Part A
CSLE+COVA Change in Focus Part B
Digital Learning
Specialized Demo 7 Build
How to Implement the CSLE+COVA Framework
If someone needs directions, don’t give them a globe. It’ll merely waste their time. But if someone needs to understand the way things are, don’t give them a map. They don’t need directions; they need to see the big picture (Seth Godin, 2017 para. 1).
In order to effectively implement the CSLE+COVA framework, you need to see the bigger picture of how these well established constructivist ideas come together. More specifically you need to see the bigger picture of how to create a significant learning environment in which we give you choice ownership and voice through authentic learning opportunities.
The following pages and videos have been designed to help you understand why and how to use CSLE+COVA framework and what that will mean to your learning experience and your organization. We recommend that you use the following pages in sequence but as you will see as you become more familiar with the CSLE+COVA framework we leave that choice up to you. We also want to point out that these are the same theoretical, pedagogical, and practical principles that we use in the Master of Digital Learning (DLL) and Leading at Lamar University so you will be in good company with hundreds of other educators who are looking to use technology to enhance the learning.
CSLE+COVA Research & Theoretical Foundation – https://www.harapnuik.org/?page_id=7079
You will find links to the peer-reviewed journal articles and book chapters that directly point to research that supports the COVA+CSLE approach and also to the theoretical foundation and supporting research that informs the CSLE+COVA.
Reference
Harapnuik, D. K., Thibodeaux, T. N., & Cummings, C. D. (2018). Choice, Ownership, and Voice through Authentic Learning Opportunities. https://www.harapnuik.org/?page_id=7291
A Comparison of the COVA and the Traditional Teacher Centered Approach
Components
COVA
Traditional Approach
Choice
Learners are given the freedom to choose how they wish to organize, structure, and present their knowledge and learning experiences. The choice extends to the authentic project or learning experience.
Teachers dictate how students are to perform, organize, structure and present information and learning experiences. When teachers do provide a choice, it is often a selection from a predetermined list of options.
Ownership
Learners are given control and ownership over the entire learning process including the selection of projects, the ePortfolio process, and all their learning tools and resources.
Teachers have full control over the learning process, the selection of assignments, the tools, and resources.
Voice
Learners are given the opportunity to use their own voice to structure their work and ideas and share those insights and knowledge with their colleagues within their organizations.
Teachers require students to emulate and replicate predetermined structures and examples and expect that students will only share their work with them and on occasion allow them to share with classmates.
Authentic Learning
Learners are given the opportunity to select and engage in authentic or “real world” learning experiences that enable them to make a genuine difference in their own learning environments and their communities.
Teachers focus on the delivery of the curriculum and strive to cover the required material that students will be tested on. When projects are used, they are most often closely controlled by the teacher and seldom have an authentic or “real world” impact.
ePortfolio
The ePortfolio is a learning portfolio that the learner fully owns and controls and uses to share their new knowledge publicly with people other than the instructor. The ePortfolio is used to organize, manage, and share all aspects of the learner’s authentic learning experiences.
If ePortfolios are used, they are most often assessment focused and students are required to use tools assigned by the teacher to deposit student’s artifacts. The ePortfolio is used to store content and enable administrators to confirm that required content has been covered.
The ePortfolio has been included in the COVA table because it is a fundamental authentic learning tool that is used to give the learner control and voice over the representation of their learning experiences. The ePortfolio is also an example of collaborative technology tool that fades into the background as the learners use it to share their voice and collaborate and communicate with their peers in and out of their classrooms. It is also important to understand that for the ePortfolio to be used effectively and equally important as a life-long learning tool beyond a program of study all the elements of COVA approach must be in place. Recent research into ePortfolio persistence by Thibodeaux, Harapnuik, & Cummings (2017) has confirmed that 80% of learners will stop using an ePortfolio after a program of study unless they see the value in the ePortfolio, are given control over the selection and use of the ePortfolio tools and are able to work on authentic projects related to careers. We need to learn from the research and recognize that if you attempt to simply bolt an ePortfolio onto a course or program of study and ask students to add assignments as artifacts, the ePortfolio becomes an assessment portfolio and most of them will not use the tool beyond the program of study.
References
Thibodeaux, T. N., Harapnuik, D. K, & Cummings, C. D. (In press). Factors that contribute to ePortfolio persistence. International Journal of ePortfolio.
Links to all the CSLE+COVA vs Traditional table comparisons:
COVA — is a learner centered active learning approach that gives the learner choice (C), ownership (O), and voice (V) through authentic (A) learning opportunities.
While the acronym COVA is somewhat authentic, the elements of the COVA approach to learning which include choice, ownership, and voice through authentic activities or assignments are based on well-established and widely accepted active learning principles. Similarly, the elements of Creating Significant Learning Environments (CSLE) are not new and neither is the idea of looking at learning from a holistic or broader learning environment perspective. So, when the COVA approach is combined with CSLE, you get a significant learning environment which takes into account all the key elements essential to effective active learning. Additionally, the learner has the opportunity to choose and take ownership of their own authentic learning experiences. All the variables are in place to help your learner make the meaningful connections which are so fundamental to learning. When you factor in a genuine digital learning portfolio, which we prefer to call an ePortfolio, you also give your learner the opportunity to find their voice, reflect on their experiences, express their insights, connect, and collaborate with a broader learning community. Research has shown that the assembly of existing or well-established ideas into new combinations is the foundation of most innovative work and knowledge advancement (Wuchty, Jones, & Uzzi, 2007; Duhigg, 2016).
COVA Components
Choice – Learners are given the freedom to choose (C) how they wish to organize, structure and present their learning experiences and evidence of learning. Choice also extends to the authentic project or learning experience. Choice promotes personalized learning (Bolliger & Sheperd, 2010) which includes adapting or developing learning goals and choosing learning tools that support the learning process (Buchem, Tur, & Hölterhof, 2014). It is crucial to acknowledge that the learner’s choice is guided by the context of the learning opportunity and by the instructor who aids the learner in making effective choices.
It is extremely important that this learning process is understood as guided discovery and not confused with pure discovery learning (Bruner, 1961, 1960). The research over the past 40 years confirms guided discovery provides the appropriate freedom to engage in authentic learning opportunities while at the same time providing the necessary guidance, modeling, and direction to lessen the cognitive overload (Mayer, 2004). In addition to instructor guidance, the creation of a significant learning environment will also provide guidance and structure to help direct the learner. The academic literature is rich with examples of choice which can often be referred to as learner agency, autonomy, empowerment, self-efficacy. Choice has a very long history as we can see from Dewey’s (1916) perspective from Democracy and Education:
The essence of the demand for freedom is the need of conditions which will enable an individual to make his own special contribution to a group interest, and to partake of its activities in such ways that social guidance shall be a matter of his own mental attitude and not a mere authoritative dictation of his acts. (p.352)
Ownership – Learners are given control and ownership (O) over the entire learning process including the selection of projects, the ePortfolio process, and all their learning tools. Once again we must reiterate that this ownership process is within the context of instructor guidance. The same benefits of guided discovery discussed above apply to this context as well. Constructivists, like Jonassen (1999), argue that ownership of the problem is key to learning because it increases learner engagement and motivation to seek out solutions. Ownership of learning is also directly tied to agency when learners make choices and “impose those choices on the world” (Buchem et al., 2014, p. 20; Buchem, Attwell, & Torres, 2011). Clark (2001) points to a learner’s own personal agency and ownership of belief systems as one major factor contributing to the willingness and persistence in sharing their learning. These belief systems must be understood prior to sharing their belief systems. Clark (2001) also claimed that media is not solely responsible for learner motivation.
Voice – Learners are given the opportunity to use their own voice (V) to structure their work and ideas and share those insights and knowledge with their colleagues within their organizations. The opportunity to share this new knowledge publicly with people other than the instructors helps the learner to deepen their understanding, demonstrate flexibility of knowledge, find their unique voice, establish a sense of purpose, and develop a greater sense of personal significance (Bass, 2014).
Authentic learning – Learners are given the opportunity to select and engage in authentic (A) learning opportunities that enable them to make a genuine difference in their own learning environments. The selection and engagement in real-world problems that are relevant to the learner furthers their ability to make meaningful connections (Donovan et al., 2000) and provide them with career preparedness not available in more traditional didactic forms of education (Windham, 2007). Research confirms that authenticity is only developed through engagement with these sorts of real-world tasks and that this type of authentic learning can deepen knowledge creation and ultimately help the learner transfer this knowledge beyond the classroom (Driscoll, 2005; Nikitina, 2011). It is also important to recognize that authenticity is not an independent or isolated feature of the learning environment but it is the result of the continual interaction between the learner, the real-world activity, and the learning environment (Barab, Squire, & Dueber, 2000). This is also why we stress that in the COVA model choice, ownership, and voice are realized through authentic learning and without this dynamic and interactive authenticity, there would be no genuine choice, ownership, and voice.
References
Barab, S. A., Squire, K. D., & Dueber, W. (2000). A co-evolutionary model for supporting the emergence of authenticity. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(2), 37-62.
Bass, R. (2014). Social pedagogies in ePortfolio practices: Principles for design and impact. Retrieved from http://c2l.mcnrc.org/pedagogy/ped-analysis/
Bolliger, D. U., & Sheperd, C. E. (2010). Student perceptions of ePortfolio integration in Online courses. Distance Education, 31(3), 295-314.
Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31(1), 21–32.
Buchem, I., Attwell, G., & Torres, R. (2011). Understanding personal learning environments: Literature review and synthesis through the activity theory lens. Proceedings of the PLE Conference, 1-33. Retrieved from http://journal.webscience.org/658/
Buchem, I., Tur, G., & Hölterhof, T. (2014). Learner control in personal learning environments: cross-cultural study. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 15(2), 14-53. Retrieved from http://www.literacyandtechnology.org/volume-15-number-2-june-2014.html
Clark, R. (2001). Learning from media: Arguments, analysis, and evidence. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to philosophy of education. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Donovan, S. M., Bransford, J. D., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2000). How People Learn: Bridging research and practice. Washington D. C.: National Academy Press.
Driscoll, M. P. (2005) Psychology of Learning for Instruction. Toronto, ON: Pearson.
Duhigg, C. (2016). Smarter faster better: The secrets of being productive. New York, NY: Random House.
Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. M. Reigeluth, Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 215-240). New York, NY: Routledge.
Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59(1), 14–19. http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.lamar.edu/10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14
Nikitina, L. (2011). Creating an authentic learning environment in the foreign language classroom. International Journal of Instruction, (4)1, 33-36. Retrieved from http://www.e-iji.net/dosyalar/iji_2011_1_3.pdf
Windham, C. (2007). Why today’s students value authentic learning. Educause Learning ELI Paper 9. Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3017.pdf
Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036–1039.
Links to the all the components of the CSLE+COVA framework:
We believe that the Digital Learning and Leading program at Lamar University must prepare educators to lead organizational change using technology innovations as a catalyst for change.
How:
To do this, the Digital Learning and Leading program at Lamar University provides an innovative, collaborative learning environment which equips our learners with the necessary tools to effectively bring about change in their organizations.
What:
The Digital Learning and Leading program at Lamar University prepares leaders who can create significant learning environments, lead organizational change, and drive innovation in a digitally-advanced century.
What is the COVA Model?
C
The freedom to choose (C) how they wish to organize, structure and present their experiences and evidences of learning.
O
Ownership (O) over the entire ePortfolio process – including selection of projects and their portfolio tools.
V
The opportunity to use their own voice (V) to revise and restructure their work and ideas.
A
Authentic (A) learning experiences that enable students to make a difference in their own learning environments.
Digital Learning and Leading Principles
The Master of Digital Learning and Leading (DLL) is a collaborative learner-centered program that embraces technological innovation through collaboration, active and authentic learning, and the creation of significant learning environments.
While technology is continually used to enhance the learning environment in the DLL, it isn’t just relegated to being another tool that teachers put in their instructional tool boxes. Innovative technologies are used as catalysts to enhance learning and when effectively employed, the technology disappears into the learning environment.
The DLL program is grounded in the approaches of Dewey, Bruner, and Piaget who advocate that learning is an active, dynamic, and social process in which learners construct new ideas or concepts based upon their current and past knowledge and experiences. The making of meaningful connections is key to the learning and knowing.
Similarly, the educator and philosopher Mortimer Adler suggests that:
teaching is a very special art, sharing with only two other arts — agriculture and medicine — an exceptionally important characteristic. A doctor may do many things for his patient, but in the final analysis it is the patient himself who must get well — grow in health. The farmer does many things for his plants or animals, but in the final analysis it is they that must grow in size and excellence. Similarly, although the teacher may help his student in many ways, it is the student himself who must do the learning. Knowledge must grow in his mind if learning is to take place (p. 11).
In the DLL program, we create and model significant learning environments where the learner takes control and ownership of their learning. Through authentic projects DLL students learn how to purposefully assemble all the key components of effective learning and create their own significant learning environments that will then, in turn, help their learners to learn how to learn.
Research and experience confirms that we learn most deeply through effective collaboration and feedback from our peers. DLL collaborative activities are structured so that students can bring their ideas to their group, examine and test those ideas, and then apply those refined and strengthened ideas to their own projects.
Collaboration is not used as a consensus driving process, rather it is part of the significant learning environment where learners are immersed and engage in productive thinking and problem solving and emerge with enhanced knowledge and skills that they can apply in their own classrooms and professional development.
In DLL the student will not be asked to sit and get professional development, but will be required to go and show what they have learned through the creation of their own learning ePortfolio. The DLL ePortfolio reinforces learner choice, ownership, voice and agency (COVA) which the DLL students are then able to share with their learners and their learning communities.
If we simply build upon the minimalist definition of an ePortfolios as a learner’s digital evidence of meaningful connections, then the answer to why one would want to create an ePortfolios is to show those meaningful connections. This notion of showing what one has created, developed, built, written or assembled is an extremely important aspect of an effective learning environment that is often overlooked beyond the show & tell sessions that we fondly remember from primary school. Consider the experience of a foreign student from Bangledesh who shared:
If somebody asked me “What did you do in the laboratory? What did you learn in your education?
What did you do?” When I go back to my country, somebody can ask me “What did you do in the US?” This is the only thing I can show them, “This is what I have done. These are my grades, these are my projects, assignments…” They can see everything. It’s me. This is the best thing that I saw through the ePortfolio…(Provezis, 2012)
When we take a closer look at an ePortfolio where the learner can show what they have created, developed, built, written or assembled we see that the benefits include:
Active & deeper learning – The act of creation means that students are engaged in reflection and deeper learning. By reflecting on and showing what they have learned through their ePortfolio the learner is fully engaged and as John Dewey affirmed:
students thrive in an environment where they are allowed to experience and interact with the curriculum, and all students should have the opportunity to take part in their own learning. (1938)
The following links provide examples and support for active and deeper learning:
Choice, Ownership, Voice, and Authenticity (COVA)** – We can give students choice, ownership, and voice over their digital domain through a learning environments and pedagogy that provides authentic assignments that gives the student the opportunity to solve real world problems in their own institutions or organizations and show those solutions through their ePortfolio.
The following links provide examples and support for choice, ownership, voice and authenticity:
Visible learning – an ePortolio helps teachers see learning through the eyes of students and through effective feedback helps learners become their own teachers.
The following links provide examples and support for visible learning:
21st Century Assessment – Grades simply do not reveal skills, knowledge and abilities. Students need to be able to show potential schools or employers what they can do and an eportfolio is one of the tools that many organizations will be looking for to see this evidence of learning and abilities.
The Coalition for Access, Quality, and Success which includes all 8 Ivy League schools plus an additional 72 top-level schools are creating an admission process and platform tools that will include an online virtual locker (an ePortfolios), a collaboration platform, and an application portal—seek to recast the process of applying to college as the culmination of students’ development over the course of their high school careers.
The following links provide additional examples and support for 21st Century Assessment:
References:
Dewey, John (1938). Experience & Education. New York, NY
Provezis, S. (2012). Weaving assessment into the institutional fabric (NILOA Examples of Good Assessment Practice). LaGuardia Community College: Urbana, IL: University of Illinois and Indiana University. Retrieved from http://www.learningoutcomeassessment.org/documents/LaGuardiaCC.pdf
**COVA – The abbreviation COVA was first used by Dr. Tilisa Thibodeaux at Lamar University in 2015 in our discussions regarding ePortfolios persistence and our collaborative research into why students tend to stop using ePortfolios after their program of study. COVA originally referred to choice, ownership, voice, and agency but after subsequent discussion agency was replaced by authentic learning opportunities because of the primary role authentic assignments play in the continued use of ePortfolios.
