TPACK. A helping hand in integrating technology in schools?!

I think both teachers as education scientists know teaching is a complicated practice. There is a lot of specific knowledge teachers have to know to teach in a good way. Classrooms are dynamic and complex, and even more complex when teachers have to integrating technology in the classroom. Teachers have to make the right combination with pedagogues and technologies. It is not about the technology, but about the pedagogical use of the technology in education. But how does teachers have to implement technology? And are there guidelines? Teaching is a difficult and loaded job, so some help is welcome.

Well, there is hope for teachers: TPACK. According to P. Fisser (personal communication, 19 October 2011) TPACK is a framework for teacher knowledge for technology integration. The model can help teachers by integrating (new) technologies in the classroom. In this article I will discuss the model and the potential use. TPACK is well known in the educational research domain. Just google 'TPACK' and you will find websites from TPACK itself (tpack.nl, tpack.org), Dutch parties like Kennisnet (pdf) and blogs. So, what is so special about this model?

Difficulties with the use of technology in education
TPACK offers help to teachers who have inadequate (or inappropriate) experience with the use of technology for teaching and learning. You cannot blame teachers for having inadequate experiences, a lot of teachers earned degrees in periods when the use of technology in education was in a different stage. And not only 'older' teachers, also novice teachers can have inadequate experiences. There are also teachers who does not consider themselves sufficiently prepared to use technology, does not know how to integrate the technology or just does not see the value or relevance to use technology. And for the teachers who wants to use technology, acquiring a new knowledge base and skill can be very challenging, especially in a busy schedule - and believe me, teachers really have a busy schedule. There is no ultimate way to integrate technology, but there are some core elements involved: content, pedagogy and technology. In my other blogpost I discussed the interrelationship between those. Now, we just take a look deeper.

In the middle of the elements: TPACK
The three core elements can be drawn as circles who overlap each other (Figure 1). Now it is clear where the abbreviation stands for: Technological knowledge, Pedagogical knowledge And Content Knowledge. Technological knowledge (TK) is about necessary skills to operate with technologies, the ability to learn new technilogies and an understanding of technologies. So basically, teachers may have a certain interest in technology and enough skills to work with it. Pedagogical knowledge (PK) is about students, students' prior knowledge, knowledge about how to use resources, classroom management and other skills a teacher may have. Content knowledge (CK) is knowledge about the content that is learned such as central facts, concepts, theories and procedures, explanatory frameworks and evidence for proof (P. Fisser, personal communication, 19 October 2011).

 

Figure 1. TPACK (from:www.tpck.org)

Like I discussed in my earlier post, there are many interrelationships between PK and CK, CK and TK, TK and PK and so on. TPACK focusses on the relationship in al three. This technological pedagogical content knowledge is an understanding that emerges from interactions among content, pedagogy and technology knowledge: " True technology integration is understanding and negotiating the relationships between these three components of knowledge" (www.tpack.org). In fact, the model shows the importance of the involvement of all three core elements, because it is all needed to implement technology successfully in education. When teachers only focus on two or even one core element, there is no balance between all core elements. In that case, the model has some similarities in message with Van den Akker's curriculair spiderweb (Van den Akker, 2003). He also states there should be a balance between curriculair elements otherwise the intervention will not work properly or will fail.
Important is the contexts circle in the model. There is no single technological solution combined with pedagogical content and content knowledge that applies for every teacher, every course, or every view of teaching. When using TPACK you always have to take the contexts into account. This connects to Koehler and Mishra "Rather, solutions lie in the ability of a teacher to flexibly navigate the spaces defined by the three elements of content, pedagogy, and technology and the complex interactions among these elements in specific contexts" (2007, p. 66). This is exactly what I  just mentioned. Every solution for the implementation of technology in education should be adapted on the specific contexts.


Nice, but how to use?
The model is helpful for those who want to implement technology in schools. TPACK gives insight in the main factors involved. But TPACK it is not just a guideline which contains all the possible answers. It is also not a simple model with phases you can follow. It is more a reproduction from the overview you may have by implementing technology in schools. TPACK users have to understand the idea of interrelationships between the elements and the importance to adapt these on each other. You can chose a technology and adapt the pedagogical style on it, but you can also search for a technology that fits within the pedagogical style, as long you keep in mind to adapt all the elements on each other.

I think TPACK is just the immersion we need for the implementation of technology in schools. Like I discussed earlier, there are interrelationships between the elements. But there are so many interrelationships you have to take into account, you can lose the overview. With TPACK teachers can easily see in a glance the most important factors. They know they have to adapt the contents on each other. How they do it, depends on the context. Teachers are free to design their solution without following phases or required steps. When teachers get stuck, the community of TPACK also provides examples and good practices for the use of TPACK, so teachers can learn from it.

I think, when teachers work with TPACK they have to know they could train their experiences with technology. They can work together or even get help from technological specialists outside the school. That is also something that depends on the context, they can work in a team (like teacher design teams) with help from the contexts to develop a "TPACK-Proof" solution. TPACK is sometimes written as TotalPACKage. I think it really is, when implementing a TPACK-designed solution, it should probably work.

In this article I am quite positive about TPACK. However, there is a negative thing about TPACK but that is moreover general in curricular development. That is, teachers need time and motivation to develop a solution with TPACK. So I would say, teachers only have to work with TPACK when they really want to implement technology in schools. Although there is a understandable model, they still have to spend a lot of time in designing the solution.




Van den Akker, J. (2003). Curriculum perspectives: an introduction (In J. Van den Akker, W. Kuiper and U. Hameyer (Eds.), Curriculum landscape and trends (pp. 1-10). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Koehler, M.J., & Mishra, P. What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Retrieved from: http://www.citejournal.org/vol9/iss1/general/article1.cfm

All together: flexibility, pedagogical approaches and technology

In this article, I will reflect in short on the (possible) relationship between flexibility, pedagogical approaches and the use of technology in education.

Flexibility
According to Collis and Moonen (2001), flexibility is "not just about distance". There are multiple conditions that make education more flexible. For example letting the students chose how they will assessed and what contents they want to learn. (For more information, see my other post about flexibility). When using flexibility, it is possible to adapt the course to student's needs, but also student's and teacher's availability. In conclusion, flexibility is all about the adjustment of the course on both teacher's and student's needs. To implement flexibility, teachers can use different pedagogical approaches and technologies.

Pedagogical approaches
Teachers can use multiple pedagogical approaches to transfer the content. There are different pedagogical approaches, for instance traditional learning, inquiry based learning, collaborative learning, problem based learning and project based learning. All these approaches have their own advantages and disadvantages when using in education. Like we have seen in simSchool for example, teachers can use different pedagogical approaches to meet every student's learning style. In conclusion, pedagogical approaches are about how the content is transferred. To support pedagogical approaches, teachers can use different technologies and be flexible in the arrangement of the course. Some approaches are more flexible than others.


Technologies
There are many technologies teachers can use in education. Think about computers, beamers, laptops, iPads and smart boards. But also mobile phones can be used. In a lecture I had, we used smartphones to answer multiple-choice questions and later we discusses the results. It speaks for itself that teachers has to decide in what way they use technologies in education. Technology can be a tool to provide flexibility, for instance when students can watch the lessons via video-conference. Technologies can be also used to manage the course and provide information to students, for instance what universities do with systems like blackboard and teletop. Technologies can also be used for pedagogical reasons. Some pedagogical approaches can be addressed with technologies. For example, in project based learning, students can communicate and share documents with each other via a course management system. Teachers can be reached via email, facebook or twitter. In conclusion, technology can be a tool to apply flexibility and pedagogical approaches.


What we have seen, is that the three topics - flexibility, pedagogical approaches and technologies - are connected with each other. They have interrelationships. To apply flexibility, some other pedagogical approaches than traditional learning could be chosen, and some technologies are needed to provide flexibility. In the other hand, some pedagogical approaches are more flexible than others and can be combined with flexibility. There are also technologies that support some pedagogical approaches. At last, technologies can be used in education, but they should be chosen by matching flexibility and pedagogical approaches. So, teachers cannot just chose a technology but they have to think how a certain technology will match flexibility and/or a chosen pedagogical approach. Technology is - in my opinion - always a tool to reach a certain goal (connected to flexibility and pedagogic approaches for example) and not just a goal itself. Technology can be used as a tool to make students more enthusiastic and motivated, but then the technology is still a tool.

In my model above, I made the interrelationships visual. Flexibility can be implemented by adapting pedagogical approaches and technology, technology can be implemented by adapting the technology on pedagogical approaches and flexibility and so on.

Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (2001, second printing 2002). Flexible learning in a digital world: Experiences and expectations. London: Kogan Page.

Cool tools for schools: playing with technology

Last week, we worked during the lesson with the website Cool Tools For Schools (http://cooltoolsforschools.wikispaces.com/). This website contains multiple tools, teachers can use in education. They selected the tools and grouped them in categories. I really like the concept, because both teachers and students dont have to search on the internet, so the website has some kind of portal functionality.
In my group we searched on a laptop and iPad for tools. Unfortunately - somthing I already knew - the iPad was not able to run the cool tools since most of them are Adobe Flash based. But, it did not matter, we searched for cool tools on the laptop. We choose to search in the category 'Drawing Tools' and tried out multiple tools. After that, we made a presentation about one tool and selected 'pros' and 'cons'.


Floor Planner
 
With Floor planner, you can design your own house and fill it with furniture. It is a web-based (cloud based) tool, so you do not have to install a program. For a web-application, I was quite surprises about the wide range of functionalities and variables you can influence. The tool is very easy to use (good interface) since you arrange everything from a top-down perspective. In this perspective you can already see a lot of details. After you finished designing, it is possible to see an 3D view. In this view, there are some bugs, but really gives you an impression about the room or house you just designed. At last, you can just insert sizes and the walls, doors or furniture changes to that size.

Use in education
I think, the tool is useful in education because it gives students the possibility to experiment with sizes and values. It also provides training in spatial awareness and eye-hand coordination.

Pros:

• Web-based, so installation needed
• Well designed and easy to use interface
• Cloud application, so always the most up to date version
• 3D view is pretty cool
• Library with furniture

Cons:

• 3D view has some bugs and lags while rotate the view
• Not possible to import own furniture models
• Possible to make unrealistic sizes of furniture and materials

More information: www.floorplanner.com


Google Sketchup
 
Google Sketchup is a tool one can use to make 2D or 3D models. The application is provided by Google and has regularly updates. You have to install the application on your computer, so it is not a web-application. With the tool, you can make cube-based models within minutes. But, you have to train the coordination in the 3D view. Sometimes it is hard to move or transform the model in the right axis. Sometimes it happens you placed a figure, and from another view it is completely out of line. But after you learned it, create something in 3D mode is very easy, especially for people where programs like 3D Studio Max are too extensive.
The coordination is, with some training, good to learn. In my own time, I already used the tool to design hobby projects. The nice thing about Sketchup is that you can import 3D models on the internet. So, if you make an overview of your room, you can search for an IKEA Billy cabinet and import it in your model!
It is also very easy you can measure sizes, so you can make an exact copy of a product.

Use in education
Since Sketchup is a more complex tool, it has a broad appliance in education. During design projects, students can make models and take a look how it will be in real. It also gives students the opportunity to see what elements you need to build to make the product. For example, if students have to make a wooden box. They can measure and fit the elements together. It really gives insight in spatial awareness and eye-hand coordination.

Pros

• Multi functional, not only for one purpose (like floorplans)
• Good smooth 3D view without bugs
• Import function for models like furniture
• After training some minutes, the 3D view helps you to design what you want in minutes

Cons

• Maybe handy to select at the beginning where you want to use it for. When making a floorplan, you will need the symbols of walls, doors and windows.
• The 3D view is for some people still too difficult
• You can measure lengths, but not specify a length to an item

More information: http://sketchup.google.com/


Word it out
 

With the webtool Word it Out, it is easy to make wordclouds in multiple designs. They offer you some examples where you can change the texts, but you can also make an own design. The tool is limited in the functions they offer, but I think that is the power of the tool. People who want more options in making their wordcloud can use other software of webtools. During the lessons we made multiple wordclouds. It works easy, but you do not always know how it will look like after you submitted your preferences. Maybe they can make a preview function, or examples of shapes you can chose between.

Really nice is actually the download to image and view full-screen function. They also give feedback/information about how to use the tool.

Use in education

I think this tool is useful for presentations or more artistic assignments.

Pros

• Wordcloud in minutes
• Nice ready to use templates
• Download to image function
• Fullscreen function
• Limited functions, so very understandable

Cons

• Limited functions could be too less for some users
• No good idea what you will get (shape)

More information: http://worditout.com

Become a teacher: simSchool

1. SimSchool

Figure 1. simSchool

Today's lesson we worked with a simulation online, called simSchool. SimSchool is classroom simulation that "supports the rapid accumulation of a teacher's experience" (simSchool, 2011, About section, para. 1). Dr. professor G. Knezek from the University of North Texas gave a guest lecture about simSchool. According to G. Knezek (personal communication, October 5, 2011) with simSchool teachers can simulate their lessons and learn from interactions in the classroom. SimSchool provides teachers for "analyzing student differences, adapting instruction to individual learner needs, gathering data about the impacts of instruction, and seeing the results of their teaching" (simSchool, About section, para. 1). Zibit and Gibson (2005) compare it with a flight simulator where novice teachers were immersed in some complexities of teaching. The students in the simulation are 7th and 12th grade students with a variety of different learning characteristics and personalities. 

SimSchool is not designed to replace the experiences from novice teachers while learning how to teach. The simulation is designed as a virtual practicum, which supports teachers in the development of teaching skills before they actually experience in real classrooms. As stated before, the main goal is to provide novice teachers insight in classroom interactions and complexities.

The simSchool About page provides information about the results of teacher’s experience. According to the simSchool (2011), teachers improve in general their teaching skill and the use of technology. There is also an “increased belief that the teacher has the skills and ability to make a difference in a child’s life” (About section, para. 2). With simSchool, teachers also improve the preparation for courses and attitudes toward inclusion of student’s special needs (simSchool, 2011). Working with simSchool has a positive impace on the mastery of deeper learning capacities that comprise the readiness to teach and acquires through rapid development of strong self-efficacy and resilience (simSchool, 2011). Zibit and Gibson (2005) state simSchool also provides expert feedback, so the simSchool program can been seen as “simulated apprenticeship” (Zibit and Gibson, p. 1) because of the “tacit processes, mental models and professional skills of an expert that are needed to succeed in teaching are embedded in the structure, rules, choices, and environment of the” (Zibit and Gibson, p. 1). 


2. Everly's bad day

In this module, I worked with a simulation where I learned to teach only one student, named Everly. Everly is a student who needs stimulation, is diligent about assignments, follows instruction and has a good self-esteem. This information was available in his file on the computer (Figure 2).

Figure 2. The student's file on the computer.

During the lesson, I started with an introduction to recall the contents from previous lesson. It was hard to get Everly to get to work. During the introduction I tried multiple ways to let Everly recall the contents from previous lesson. After the introduction, I gave Everly the task silent reading, but after finishing this task his motivation went downhill. Because I knew Everly is creative, I told him to make a creative product about the content. Then his motivation grew.

Figure 3. Everly's graph.

In conclusion about Everly, not every task was right to give to Everly. When deciding what task to give, Everly became bored and went to do something else. After such a period, it was hard to get Everly back to work. Figure 3 shows six factors in a graph, where the teacher can see the progress of the lesson.

3. The module

The module is a simulation of a classroom where you have to teach one or multiple students. The time in the simulation goes six times faster than the actual time. So, you can play of pause the simulation when thinking about the next task you will give to the students. In the simulation, you can use multiple buttons to assign a recall, skill/concept, strategic thinking or extended thinking task. These grouped tasks are separated in different actual tasks, like ‘silent reading’, ‘do design on multiple criteria’ or even ‘do a team worksheet’. It is also possible to talk to the students. Talking is grouped in behavioral assertion, behavioral observation, behavioral inquiry, academic assertion, academic observation and academic inquiry. These groups contains multiple items vary from positive to negative.

In the simulation it is clear that you as teacher have to try different ways of teaching by giving different tasks to the students or students individual. You also have to react to students who have questions and sometimes there is need to give students separate tasks simultaneous. In the simulation, it is clear the teacher must deal with a lot of different variables.

The usability of the simulation could be more effective in my opinion. The buttons you have to use by giving tasks are small, and you have to keep your mouse on the icon to view its definition. So, the icons used are not enough to understand the functionality. While the simulation records the time, in the simulation you lose time by finding out the button’s definition and clicking. I think an improvement for the simulation is to create bigger buttons with both an icon and text. In that case, the icon should be more explainable.

 Figure 4. Small buttons.

 4. Reflection

I think the simulation is usable for both teachers and novice teachers. Most teacher preparation programs focus on preparing novice teachers through methods courses (Zibit & Gibson, 2005). These courses include a mixture of “lecture, hands-on activities, and lesson plan development assignments” (Zibit & Gibson, p. 2). Such courses deal more with the ‘know-how’ of teaching mathematics, rather than tacit ‘know-how’ knowledge. SimSchool tries to provide training to learn ‘know-how’ knowledge. ‘Know-how’ is even more than ‘know-what’ essential knowledge when becoming a professional (Orlikowski in Zibit & Gibson). In my opinion simSchool meets the need to learn outside the classroom the ‘know-how’. Of course, a program like simSchool is not complete, there are far too many variables the program’s designers have to count for. But such a simulation is a good solution for providing apprenticeship opportunities and expert feedback, when in practice there is too little time. Besides, simSchool is a handy simulation of the classroom, where a novice teacher can make mistakes without consequences. When working with simSchool, novice teachers have to keep in mind to keep the general principles and complexities of learning in the classroom.

Resources

• simSchool. (2011). simSchool. Retrieved on 10 october 2011, from: www.simschool.org
• Zibit, M., & Gibson, D. (2005). simSchool: The game of teaching. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 1(6). Retrieved from: www.innovateonline.info/pdf/vol1_issue6/simSchool_-__The_Game_of_Teaching.pdf

Flexibility: learner-centered?

I was thinking, there could be a relation between modern educational approaches and flexible learning. When a course is more flexible, students have the ability and influence to make key decisions about learning dimensions are made in advance by the instructor or institution (P. Fisser, personal communication, september 28, 2011). The learner has a range of options to choose. Maybe you can conclude, there is a movement from teacher-centered education to learner-centered education. Students can choose what to learn of how the assessment would be like. In practice when instructors use other educational approaches such as project-based learning, inquiry-learning or problem-based learning, the already choose what to learn, how to work on the assignment (together, in groups) and how many interaction they have with the instructor. In my opinion, flexible learning will be automatically achieved by using modern educational approaches.

Flexible learning

In the first class of the course Pedagogies for flexible learning supported by technology we talked about main characteristics of flexible learning. Flexible techniques, including online technologies, are widely used to meet different needs of students (Dorrian & Wache, 2009). For example, in adult education a potential solution for the great difference in availability in time, place and needs is to deliver flexible methods for learning. We know flexible learning is something about the learner's influence in the education, but what makes a course flexible and how can this be achieved? People often think about learning from a distance (distance learning) when people talk about flexible learning: "Flexible learning is often taken as synonymous with distance education" (Collis & Moonen, 2001, p. 2). This is actually not the case, because flexible learning is also possible in a more traditional method of instruction. According to Collis and Moonen), there are nineteen important dimensions of flexible learning grouped in five main dimensions. Only one dimension says something about distance:

"Distance relates only to Item 15. Clearly there is much more that can be involved in moving from fixed, or less-flexible, to more flexible learning".

(Collis & Moonen, 2001, p. 3)

Collis and Moonen (2001) explained "it’s not just about distance". The dimensions of flexible learning are grouped in five: (1) flexibility related to time, (2) flexibility related to content, (3) flexibility related to entry requirements, (4) flexibility related to instructional approaches and resources and (5) flexibility related to delivery and logistics. In this post, I will discuss from every group one important factor to achieve flexible learning. After that, I will describe a technological solution that supports flexible learning.


Flexibility related to time
When flexibility is about time educational designers often mean times for starting and finishing a course, the submission of assignments, the tempo and pace of studying and the moments of assessment (Collis & Moonen, 2001). Time is also seen as moments the teacher and students have face-to-face interaction with each other. For students flexibility can be useful, because students can choose when to follow a lesson and when to submit an assignment. In that case, they can decide by themselves how many time they spend on the courses they follow. For example, if one course is very tough for a student, he or she wants to spend more time on working on that course. But when other courses have many deadlines, the student has to spend all the time on reaching those deadlines. In this example, tempo and pace is also addressed. 
Flexibility related to time however has some gaps when implementing is. While the student is flexible it also requires a lot of independence and planning for he student. And the teacher needs more time to meet all student's needs. In courses it is often more time efficient to provide the course knowledge in face-to-face lessons.

Flexibility related to content
Flexibility related to content is quite logical as the title says. Students have the ability to decide what topics, parts of the course and key materials of the course they want to follow (Collis & Moonen, 2001). They can also decide to gain the knowledge presented in a more theoretical or practical way. According to assessment, the student can choose the assessment standards and completion requirements (Collis & Moonen). In some education, there is no need to learn everything from a course of study. A real-world example.

If a technical student follows a pre-master technical physics because he will study nanotechnology and the pre-master contains courses about thermal conductivity, there is no need to learn this because the student will not use this knowledge in the master he already decided to follow. 

So, when the content is flexible the student can choose what to learn according to his or her own interests and professional development. However, (also according to the assessment) there are also guidelines for assessing the student's gained knowledge. When students has too much flexibility in choosing the content, it is really difficult to assess all students equally. And also, just think about how to manage certifications for all students who followed the same study but learned other content.
According to the assessment, a real world example. In my bachelor with the course Statistics, we could choose to make short assessments every week to upgrade your final result of the exam. But you also had the possibility to make only the exam.

Flexibility related to entry requirements
This flexibility is about conditions for participation (Collis & Moonen, 2001). On course level, sometimes students need to achieve some courses before following another course (prerequisites). But also think about the entry qualifications students need to follow a whole study. If you did not finished school, but you have a lot of work experience and gained knowledge on the work floor, are you allowed to participate in a study?

Flexibility related to instructional approach and resources
This kind of flexibility is about pedagogy and resources (Collis & Moonen, 2001). There is flexibility in the social organization of learning (face-to-face, working in groups or just individual), the language used during the lessons, the learning resources and the instructional organization of learning (Collis & Moonen). In most times, the teacher decides the used language and learning resources. Learning resources can be books, websites, online documents but also magazines and newspapers. Teachers often use a combination of instructional approaches. For example, the teacher gives in a traditional way information about a subject, after that students work in groups on a assignment (problem-based learning) and discuss it later with the whole class. In this example the instructional approach is chosen by the instructor. It is also possible to let the students choose. For example at the beginning of a course if they like to work in groups or individual on assignments. The instructional approach meets also flexibility related to time a bit, because the instructional approach has influence on the times when students and teachers have interaction.

Flexibility related to delivery and logistics
Flexibility related to delivery and logistics is about place and procedures (Collis & Moonen, 2001). The flexibility in place is about the time and place where contact between teacher and students occurs, location and technology for participating and the delivery channel for course information. In this flexibility both teacher and students can choose where the contact will take place. Is it in a classroom or via skype or a video-conference? Maybe it is even possible in a cafe where the teacher will meet groups of students and discuss the progress of a assignment they work on.
The flexibility in procedures is about methods and technology for obtaining support and making contact, types of help, communication on available technology required (Collis & Moonen). this flexibility is about the communication and used technologies for interaction and support. Like we do in this course, we communicate via Facebook, Blogger and Blackboard. Every communication channel has its own advantages and disadvantages. For course information we use Blackboard, but for getting to know each other Facebook is a nice channel. Via Blogger, the teacher can follow what we learned. When multiple channels are used in a course, the student can choose which channel they prefer and want to use most frequent.

But... why flexible learning? Who wants it?
Like you can read, making education more flexible asks a lot of effort both from the teacher and students. The more choices the learner has, the more demands and challenges are there for the instructor (P. Fisser, personal communication, september 28, 2011). According to Collis and Moonen, "students will increasingly require educational programmes and a way of experiencing those programmes tailored to their own situations". (p. 9). But also teachers, they can choose from more approaches and materials. In short, both teachers and students want some form of flexibility but they have to put effort in it to make it happen. Flexibility fits within a lifelong learning (Collis & Moonen) where 'students' (working people) do not want to spend a whole day in the classroom.


Web based technology supporting flexible learning
According to flexible learning, I can describe a nice online environment that supports flexible learning. This environment is called 'Hair Level XL' and is made for the hairdressers who learn the field at school. In this environment, lessons were given with instructional videos. The learning environment is divided in 24 levels (compare with chapters) where specific topics are addressed. The student can follow the lessons at home, at school or even in the train (when there is an internet connection). In the lessons there also practice questions to test and evaluate the new gained knowledge. Both student and teacher can follow the development by viewing a overview with results.

 Check: www.hairlevelxl.nl

Resources: 

• Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (2001, second printing 2002). Flexible learning in a digital world: Experiences and expectations. London: Kogan Page.
• Dorrian, J., & Wache, D. (2009). Introduction of an online approach to flexible learning for on-campus and distance education students: Lessons learned and ways forward. Nurse Education Today 29, pp 157–167.