3 different interpretations of authentic learning
1. Making learning personally meaningful
2. Situated learning in the context in which is is surprised
3. Providing learners with authentic tasks (open ended and ill structured)
1. Linking learning to own personal situation - e.g. photographs linking chem to everyday life
2. Culturally situated context - where it will be applied. E.g clinical or professional placement, role play, etc
3. Authenticity of tasks rather than context (Herrington et al 2004). Real world relevance beyond domain specifics, ill defined, competing solutions, sustained period of time
Role of media 'skins' in a virtual world/environment. Context in which you learn heavily affects ability to recall information. Are learning environment skins window dressing? Taken too literally??? Representation of physical environments over-elaborate and missing cognitive and meta-cognitive tasks.
Are virtual worlds realising their potential as settings for authentic learning? E.g. surgeon in second life, are mouse skills really useful in what they can take into their career. Note too virtual patients have straightforward conditions with no red herrings, distractors, etc.
Whose authenticity and authentic to what? Rise in professional post-grad education. Educators often provide contrived contexts. The real world on a short leash.
Motivation - 1 & 3 intrinsic, 2 extrinsic. Personally meaningful especially benefits low (extrinsic) motivation students. 2 for students who know where they are heading (mature age etc). 3 for high ability students.
Transfer implications - near transfer to similar problems, far transfer is broader application.
1. indirect benefits to transfer via engagement and motivation
2. near transfer where context is simply a 'skin' around inauthentic tasks but potentially far
3. focus on far transfer due to higher order thinking require (Sweller & Clark 2006)