Departing from constructivist principles as a theoretical point of reference, we propose for AVT on-line a viewpoint based on the metaphor of the “negotiated construction” of personal experiences, opinions, knowledge outlines and the social environment, starting from the assembling of new elements, upon those that already exist.
Important conditions within this context are, therefore, collaboration be- tween individuals and the shared construction of meanings as interaction between both factors. This construction is undertaken through interaction, negotiation, mediation, communication... of re¶ections, reasoning, explora- tions and intentions generated by the presentation of certain contents. Gunawardena (1994) refers to the debate on interaction in distance teaching- learning virtual environments, basing his argument on three types of interac- tion: student-content, student-instructor, and student-student. Later McIsaac and Gunawardena (1996) added that interaction between the student and technological methods should also be included, which is crucial for the AVT. In this type of interaction the student interacts with these methods in order to be able to do so later with the content, the tutor or other students.
We can, then, enumerate four types of interaction:
Student-teacher: which provides motivation, feedback, dialogue, personal guidance, etc. Within this new perspective the tutor’s role is to guide, support and facilitate the student’s learning process through exposure to multimedia, mediation and shared communication. In this way, a learning system is gener- ated with the student as its central axis, in a relational system based upon
dialogue and cooperation between students. The student therefore ªnds him- self at the centre and connected to resources such as the teacher, tutors, coordinators, other students, experts, instruction from the multimedia materi- als themselves, computer programmes, libraries, network/systems references, databases…
Teachers in a virtual learning environment (VLE) have two basic teaching roles:
A – Consultative. Individualised and collective performance regarding the learning of contents (conceptual, procedural and/or attitudinal). It can be thought of in terms of the content specialist providing a supporting role, which corresponds with the duty of teacher-consultant, the undertaking of the duties of academic tutor, of whom clariªcations and answers to ques- tions regarding very speciªc theoretical or practical content in relation to the contents are sought. His innovative vision must be directed towards a new perspective. In the case of PGAVT we have the policy of recruiting teachers who are also experienced active translators in the ªeld taught, who can pro- vide ªrst hand experience in both the translation and the industry:
– Instead of being a teacher in a live class he must adapt to being a consultant or guide and provider of network resources, information regarding the industry and market trends. This change of attitude is crucial in a VLE and moreover for PGAVT.
– He is an information provider who must take more into account the psychological teaching design of the learning experience than the logical limits of the content itself.
– Supply students with the initial work structure, encouraging them to become more personally responsible for their studies, in some cases acting as real clients would.
– Has to become another member of the VLE, directing questions at the students rather than supplying answers.
– Give up total control of the learning situation in order to share it with the student. The roles of teacher-student can, in fact, alter between them at diŸerent times.
– These new roles between teacher and student dilute the traditional power structure, facilitating communication and interaction.
solutions to the diŸerent learning styles of students. In the PGAVT we have students from all types of academic background, not only from English Philology or Translation Studies.
Garrison (1993) emphasises the teacher’s role as a developer of cognitive skills in the student that can be inferred and transferred. The learning process should be designed with the support of technology, not merely in order to assimilate information more quickly or easily, but rather to encourage and stimulate students to construct their own meaning and generate new knowl- edge/understanding.
Typical tasks:
1. Indicate what the student needs to research or do, supplying the neces- sary information. This is typically done at the beginning of the module, and in particular every Monday when a new unit starts.
2. Reinforce the contents worked on through summaries, asking questions and answering them either publicly or privately, as appropriate: which performed in the forum.
3. Evaluate the students’ tasks individually and send them the results in the same way: that is every Monday.
4. Work collaboratively with groups of students. In some units team work is required.
5. Undertake discussion in workshops or virtual seminars, mainly through weekly chats.
B – Counselling. Personal guidance and tutoring on the educational process. According to Beaudoin (1990), one of the teacher-advisor’s functions as a learning mediator is to constantly “monitor” the stages of the learning process, in order to be able to adapt to possible changes that can arise in the student’s conduct and way of thinking, in relation to his own process and context.
The advisor should encourage students to participate directly in activities, whether through direct positive reinforcement or in an indirect way through tasks that encourages participation. An important consequence of the change that has taken place in the role of the advisor is the adoption of a more positive attitude towards learning facilitation. This has increased the interaction between advisor and students, inevitably leading to greater personal and personalised contact. Under these criteria the teacher-advisor becomes more of a colleague who is near the student and helps him to overcome moments of di¹culty.
Student-content: access to instructional contents and study material.
The content presented as digital didactic material make up the supporting axis of the pedagogic mediation in a virtual environment. Its objective is to ensure students’ motivation, facilitate the learning process and the acquisition of new knowledge. The contents should, therefore, be conceived more from the per- spective of the student and the environment, and less from the linearity of the contents themselves. But this content design must also endeavour to respond to this context, which must itself look for and ensure the success of the objectives. The content will be presented in a format that takes into account a logical structure and at the same time a psychological appropriateness to the student and the method.
Student-student: exchange of information, ideas, motivation, parallel help between equals, etc. In the conception of the VLE, these types of interaction should be considered very important in the learning process. Working in groups and on projects should, then, be encouraged, and from this speciªc roles will be deªned according to formative proªles or individual availability. This can, through the combination of diŸerent group dynamics, achieve excel- lent results.
The projects method is a learning strategy that focuses on central and principle concepts of a discipline. It involves the students in problem solving and other meaningful tasks, allows them to work autonomously in order to construct their own knowledge and culminates in real results which they generate themselves.
Comparing the results of this way of working with traditional learning methods, it has been proven that students learn more when they put collabora- tive learning into practice, through the VLE’s communication tools. They remember content for longer, develop higher reasoning and thought skills, and feel more conªdent and valued by themselves and others (Millis 1996). The elements always present in this type of learning are:
1. Cooperation 2. Responsibility
3. DiŸerent level of Communication
4. Team work, companionship and sense of relevance 5. On-going self-evaluation
Communicative student-interface: all communication between participants of the formative/training process and their access to the relevant information is
undertaken through some type of interface. What is meant by this is the aspect, metaphor, structure, typology, and levels of action that the user can produce within this context. The use of diŸerent interfaces is determined by several variables (cost of opportunity, eŸectiveness, availability, etc.).
According to McIsaac and Gunawardena (1996) the relationship between the student and the technology which oŸers the opportunity to communicate with the teacher, other students and access contents, is a fundamental factor in the success or failure of distance learning processes.
In order for students to be able to work with the course contents they should be able to demonstrate their ability to interact with the interface and the technological system that supports it. Students should also be conversant with the speciªc communication protocols linked with the delivery system so that they are able to eŸectively transmit and receive information. Within the PGAVT platform and its communication tools and facilities, there are added technological challenges such as the self installation of some programmes (TRADOS, Dejà vú, Subtitul@m, etc). This extra technical awareness – com- pared with traditional teaching situation where students in university IT rooms learn with these programmes already installed and running – adds a challenge and at the same time a sense of success which is the fruit of communication between students and teacher-students.
The challenge for distance learning educators is to facilitate the develop- ment of a mental model, based on metaphors appropriate to students which help to ensure successful interaction with the mediating technology.
7. Document typology in a VLE