![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MOLTA: A Model of Learning and Teaching ActivitiesAuthor: Richard Caladine University of Wollongong, New South WalesKeywords: MOLTA, Model of Learning and Teaching Activities. Article style and source: Moderated. First electronic publication. Contents
MOLTAMOLTA is a categorisation of teaching and learning activities that has been designed to assist in focussing thinking when teachers and curriculum designers undertake:
What MOLTA does not doThe model is not intended to describe a new theoretical analysis of teaching and learning, rather it is an instrument of practical use. It must be noted that while complete in itself the model operates within the total teaching and learning environment. Hence such factors as student motivation, demography, culture, etc. must be considered in conjunction with its use.Five groups of teaching and learning activitiesIn MOLTA teaching and learning activities are classified into five groups:
MOLTA models combinations of teaching and learning activities. For example Delivery plus Interaction with Materials could be seen as a model of the transfer of information during a lecture. However, Delivery alone is not suggested as an appropriate model of teaching and learning. How MOLTA is usedIn enhancing existing subjects the teacher (or designer) uses MOLTA to create a model of their own practice. This can be done for:
In the same way, when designing a subject the designer considers each element of the model, firstly to ascertain if it is needed to achieve the desired learning outcomes and secondly to match the element to specific teaching techniques. When converting a subject for a new mode MOLTA can be used to model the activities used in the old mode and match them to techniques and technologies afforded by the new mode. Example 1. A subject is converted for delivery to a satellite campus.An undergraduate subject that has been taught locally for some time is to be delivered to a satellite campus. The satellite campus is linked to the main campus by video conference and has audio-visual facilities and a limited computer lab. The subject has traditionally been presented as fourteen lectures and thirteen tutorials.The first step in using the model is to categorise the activities in the traditionally delivered subject.
The second step is to examine the facilities and the teaching activities that can be fostered at the satellite campus in the light of the categories of the model.
The categories of the model for each campus are compared in table 1. Table 1. A Comparison of Categories Between Campuses
While, in this instance, none of the categories are missing from the model as applied to either campus, it is important to complete the third step in the process which is to compare each category of teaching and learning activities at each campus and ensure that they are effective and will lead to the desired learning outcomes. It is also important to consider perceived deficiencies in a category with other benefits. For example the reduction in access to the library at the satellite campus can be considered against the convenience of its location. Example 2. The use of a radio or television is investigated as a substitute for face to face delivery.In this example an on-campus subject, consisting of lectures and tutorials is to be converted to broadcast radio or television and printed materials for distant students. As the application of the model to the traditionally delivered subject is the same as in example one we will move to the second step and apply the model to the subject delivered by radio or television. In both cases (ie, television and radio) the programs are to be prerecorded and delivered in weekly episodes.
The categories for each mode of delivery are compared in table 2. Table 2. Comparison of Categories for Different Modes of Delivery
There are noticable differences, between modes for each element of the model. It must be stressed that simply because one element is missing or seemingly weaker it does not necessarily follow that the effectiveness or efficiency of the learning outcomes will be significantly reduced. It is important to consider the benefits provided by the new mode in the light of reductions or absences of categories. In this example the teacher or designer might consider that the absence of interaction between students was/was more than/was less than compensated by a structure that let students study where and when it suited them. This workshop was originally published in Overview, volume 3, number 1, 1996, pp 45-48. Overview is a publication of the CEDIR (Centre for Educational Development and Interactive Resources), University of Wollongong, edited by Richard Caladine. About the authorRichard CaladineCEDIR (Centre for Educational Development and Interactive Resources University of Wollongong NSW 2522 Australia Email: richard_caladine@uow.edu.au Feedback to the author is welcome. Copyright © Richard Caladine, 1997. For uses other than personal research or study, as permitted under the Copyright Laws of your country, permission must be negotiated with the author. Any further publication permitted by the author must include full acknowledgement of first publication in ultiBASE (http://ultibase.rmit.edu.au). Please contact the Editor of ultiBASE for assistance with acknowledgement of subsequent publication. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Send feedback to
manager@ultibase.rmit.edu.au Copyright © 2001 Faculty of Education Language and Community Services Document URL: http://ultibase.rmit.edu.au/Articles/june97/calad1.htm Last Updated: 30-June-1997 by Marita Mueller |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||