Conditions for effective smart learning environments

Abstract

Smart learning environments (SLEs) are defined in this paper as physical environments that are enriched with digital, context-aware and adaptive devices, to promote better and faster learning. In order to identify the requirements for 'better and faster learning', the idea of Human Learning Interfaces (HLI) is presented, i.e. the set of learning related interaction mechanisms that humans expose to the outside world that can be used to control, stimulate and facilitate their learning processes. It is assumed that humans have and use these HLIs for all types of learning, and that others, such as parents, teachers, friends, and digital devices can interact with the interface to help a person to learn something. Three basic HLIs are identified that represent three distinct types of learning: learning to deal with new situations (identification), learning to behave in a social group (socialization) and learning by creating something (creation). These three HLIs involve a change in cognitive representations and behavior. Performance can be increased using the practice HLI, and meta-cognitive development is supported by the reflection HLI. This analysis of HLIs is used to identify the conditions for the development of effective smart learning environments and a research agenda for SLEs.

A research framework of smart education

“…And the goal of smart learning environment is to provide self-learning, self-motivated and personalized services which learners can attend courses at their own pace and are able to access the personalized learning content according to their personal difference (Kim et al 2013). Koper (2014) proposed that smart learning environments are defined as physical environments that are enriched with digital, context-aware and adaptive devices, to promote better and faster learning. Hwang (2014) specified that the potential criteria of a smart learning environment include context-aware, able to offer instant and adaptive support to learners, and able to adapt the learner interface and subject contents.…”

Standards for smart education – towards a development framework

“…Of the papers discussed, only Spector (2014) and Koper (2014) attempt to ground their conceptualization of a SLE in theoretical fields that underpin learning theories; however, their approaches are substantially different. For Spector, there is a serendipitous and associative way of searching for a theoretical grounding in the question: How do these perspectives inform the development of a conceptual framework for smart learning environments?…”

“…In Spector's framework (Fig. 2) each new scan through philosophical, psychological and technological perspectives will lead to new characteristics that are classified related Koper (2014) to their desirability according to metrics that are highly contextual and temporal (e.g., efficiency, innovative). The model is without boundaries, as there are no limits to the number of iterations in search for characteristics.…”

Smart-Glasses: Exposing and Elucidating the Ethical Issues

“…2013). Block unpleasant experiences and avoid anxiety (in a hospital setting) (Tse et al 2002) and to support patients with specific needs (of care) (Hetterich et al 2014) Psychological and health risks with smartglasses have been pointed out (Jacquemard et al 2014) Making learning more efficient or create new learning modes (Koper 2014). However, the outcomes of learning with smart-glasses are mixed (Sapargaliyev 2015) Safety aspects are also identified in the use of smart-glasses, e.g., in (pervasive) gaming (Valente et al 2015) or navigation (Jones 2014) Provide safety and security, e.g., for persons with various forms of impairment, such as detecting hazards for persons with visual impairment (He et al 2015), or in the industry (Neira Millan 2013) Smart-glasses are envisioned to threaten security (Boissier and Castelfranchi 2015) as information about a person and his or her behavior may become accessible by others (Nyang et al 2014).…”