Implementing Learner Experience Design in University Teaching An Action Research Study on Enhancing Faculty-Student Engagement and Motivation
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The Learner Experience Design (LXD) framework aims to create engaging and relevant learning experiences by considering students' past, motivations, challenges, frustrations, emotions, and needs, as well as their interactions with faculty, staff, and other students. The LXD process involves three steps: research, design, and evaluation. During the research phase, instructors gather important insights through student interviews. In the design phase, they develop a plan for a learning experience. Finally, in the evaluation phase, they assess the effectiveness of the learning experience and plan for potential revisions. This article details a case study of a workshop series in which faculty members from universities spanning several countries utilized LXD with their students. It shares observations collected from workshop participants that indicate not only evidence of intended innovative curricular enhancements, but an unanticipated increase in student-teacher connection and motivation.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC-BY) 4.0 International, allowing others to share the work with proper acknowledgement and citation of the work's authorship and initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- Authors are able to enter separate, additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- In pursuit of manuscripts of the highest quality, multiple opportunities for mentoring, and greater reach and citation of JoSoTL publications, JoSoTL encourages authors to share their drafts to seek feedback from relevant communities unless the manuscript is already under review or in the publication queue after being accepted. In other words, to be eligible for publication in JoSoTL, manuscripts should not be shared publicly (e.g., online), while under review (after being initially submitted, or after being revised and resubmitted for reconsideration), or upon notice of acceptance and before publication. Once published, authors are strongly encouraged to share the published version widely, with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
References
Abbott, D. (2020). Intentional learning design for educational games: A workflow supporting novices and experts. In M. Schmidt, A. A. Tawfik, I. Jahnke, & Y. Earnshaw (Eds.). Learner and User Experience Research: An Introduction for the Field of Learning Design & Technology. EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/ux/ 11_intentional_learn. Retrieved on 7 Aug 2021.
Awan, O. A. (2019). What makes a great teacher?. Radiographics, 39(7), 2167-2168.
Bevis, E. O., & Watson, J. (1989). Toward a caring curriculum: A new pedagogy for nursing.
Brenner, W., Uebernickel, F., & Abrell, T. (2016). Design thinking as mindset, process, and toolbox. In Design thinking for innovation (pp. 3-21). Springer, Cham.
Brown, B. L. (2003). Teaching style vs. learning style. Myths and realities, 26(1).
Chang, A. F., Berger, S. E., & Chang, B. (1981). The relationship of student self-esteem and teacher empathy to classroom learning. Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior.
Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2005). Understanding student differences. Journal of engineering education, 94(1), 57-72.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of educational research, 74(1), 59-109.
Frymier, A. B., & Houser, M. L. (2000). The teacher‐student relationship as an interpersonal relationship. Communication education, 49(3), 207-219.
Gasparini, A. (2015, February). Perspective and use of empathy in design thinking. In ACHI, the eight international conference on advances in computer-human interactions (pp. 49-54).
Gillespie, M. (2005). Student–teacher connection: a place of possibility. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(2), 211-219.
Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, A. W. (2004). Collective efficacy beliefs: Theoretical developments, empirical evidence, and future directions. Educational researcher, 33(3), 3-13.
Gruen, D., Rauch, T., Redpath, S., & Ruettinger, S. (2002). The use of stories in user experience design. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 14(3-4), 503-534.
Guzdial, M., Kafai, Y. B., Carroll, J. M., Fischer, G., Schank, R., & Soloway, E. (1995). Learner-centered system design: HCI perspec- tive for the future. DIS ‘95, 143–147. https://doi.org/10/dfwn4p. Retrieved 7 Aug 2021.
Hardre, P. L., Davis, K. A., & Sullivan, D. W. (2008). Measuring teacher perceptions of the “how” and “why” of student motivation. Educational Research and Evaluation 14(2), 155-179.
Hardre, P. L., Huang, S. H., Chen, C. H., Chiang, C. T., Jen, F. L., & Warden, L. (2006). High school teachers motivational perceptions and strategies in a East Asian nation. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 34(2), 199-221.
Hassenzahl, M. (2013). User experience and experience design. The encyclopedia of human-computer interaction, 2.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Interaction Book Company.
Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success. School psychology review, 31(3), 313-327.
Martin, A. J. (2006). The relationship between teachers’ perceptions of student motivation and engagement and teachers’ enjoyment of the confidence in teaching. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 34(1), 73-93.
Maslow, A.H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. In Psychological Review, 50 (4), 430-437.
Meyers, S., Rowell, K., Wells, M., & Smith, B. C. (2019). Teacher empathy: A model of empathy for teaching for student success. College Teaching, 67(3), 160-168.
Mikkonen, K., Kyngäs, H., & Kääriäinen, M. (2015). Nursing students’ experiences of the empathy of their teachers: a qualitative study. Advances in health sciences education, 20(3), 669-682.
Norman, D., Miller, J., & Henderson, A. (1995, May). What you see, some of what's in the future, and how we go about doing it: HI at Apple Computer. In Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems (p. 155).
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co‐creating unique value with customers. Strategy & leadership.
Pruitt, J., & Grudin, J. (2003, June). Personas: practice and theory. In Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Designing for user experiences (pp. 1-15).
Reis, E. (2011). The lean startup. New York: Crown Business, 27.
Saeed, S., & Zyngier, D. (2012). How motivation influences student engagement: A qualitative case study. Journal of Education and learning, 1(2), 252-267.
Slavin, R. E. (1987). Grouping for instruction in the elementary school. Educational Psychologist, 22(2), 109-127.
Tackett, S., Wright, S., Lubin, R., Li, J., & Pan, H. (2017). International study of medical school learning environments and their relationship with student well‐being and empathy. Medical education, 51(3), 280-289.
van Velsen, L. S. (2011). User-centered design for personalization.
Watt, H. M. G., & Richardson, P. W. (2008). Learning and Instruction Special Issue: Motivation for Teaching.