Literatura académica sobre el tema "Electronic books. Education Curriculum evaluation Interdisciplinary approach in education"

Indonesia is a country that has a high potential for natural disasters. Picture story book is a form of disaster management learning that can help children from an early age to prepare for a natural disaster. The aims of this study to develop story books as a disaster management learning media, to improve knowledge and skills of children and teacher about the understanding, principles, and actions of rescue when facing the natural disasters, to increase the teacher’s learning quality in disaster management. Developmental research approach is used to execute the study. A total of 48 children aged 5-6 years have to carry out pre-test and post-test. Pre-test data shows that children's knowledge about disaster management with an average of 47.92% and its improved at post-test with 76,88%. Five theme of story books involves floods, landslides, earthquakes, tsunamis, lands and forest fires is the product. Dissemination of five story books are proper for children and improve their understanding of disaster management. Keywords: Early Childhood Education, Management Disaster, Storybooks Reference: Abulnour, A. H. (2013). Towards efficient disaster management in Egypt. Housing and Building National Research Center. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2013.07.004 Adiyoyoso, W. (2018). Manajemen Bencana. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara. Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813 Batič, J. (2019). Reading Picture Books in Preschool and Lower Grades of Primary School. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, (November), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.554 Bosschaart, A., van der Schee, J., Kuiper, W., & Schoonenboom, J. (2016). Evaluating a flood- risk education program in the Netherlands. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 50, 53–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.07.002 Codreanu, T. A., Celenza, A., & Jacobs, I. (2014). Does disaster education of teenagers translate into better survival knowledge, knowledge of skills, and adaptive behavioral change? A systematic literature review. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 29(6), 629–642. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049023X14001083 Delicado, A., Rowland, J., Fonseca, S., & Nunes, A. (2017). Children in Disaster Risk Reduction in Portugal : Policies , Education , and ( Non ) Participation. 246–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-017-0138-5 Demiroz, F., & Haase, T. W. (2019). The concept of resilience: a bibliometric analysis of the emergency and disaster management literature. Local Government Studies, 45(3), 308–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2018.1541796 Efthymis, L., Michael, S., Alexia, G., Panagiotis, P., Vassiliki, A., Kate, V., & Spyros, P. (2014). Disaster Data Centre — An Innovative Educational Tool for Disaster Reduction through Education in Schools. (September), 35–40. Faber, M. H., Giuliani, L., Revez, A., Jayasena, S., Sparf, J., & Mendez, J. M. (2014). Interdisciplinary Approach to Disaster Resilience Education and Research. Procedia Economics and Finance, 18(September), 601–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2212- 5671(14)00981-2 Frankenberg, E., Gillespie, T., Preston, S., Sikoki, B., & Thomas, D. (2011). Mortality, the family and the Indian Ocean Tsunami. Economic Journal, 121(554), 162–182. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2011.02446.x Fujioka, T., & Sakakibara, Y. (2018). School education for disaster risk reduction in Japan after the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami (GEJET). Terrae Didatica, 14(3), 313– 319. https://doi.org/10.20396/td.v14i3.8653531 Guha-Sapir, D., Van Panhuis, W. G., & Lagoutte, J. (2007). Short communication: Patterns of chronic and acute diseases after natural disasters - A study from the International Committee of the Red Cross field hospital in Banda Aceh after the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. Tropical Medicine and International Health, 12(11), 1338–1341. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365- 3156.2007.01932.x Haggstrom, M. (2020). The art of read-aloud, body language and identity construction: A multimodal interactional analysis of interaction between parent, child and picture book. International Journal of Language Studies, 14(1), 117–140. Halim, L., Abd Rahman, N., Zamri, R., & Mohtar, L. (2018). The roles of parents in cultivating children’s interest towards science learning and careers. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 39(2), 190–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2017.05.001 Hamele, M., Gist, R. E., & Kissoon, N. (2019). P ro v i s i o n o f C a re f o r C r i t i c a l l y I l l C h i l d ren i n Disasters. 35, 659–675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccc.2019.06.003 Justice, L. M., & Piasta, S. (2011). Developing children’s print knowledge through adult-child storybook reading interactions: Print referencing as an instructional practice. In Handbook of early literacy research (In S. B. N). Kitagawa, K. (2016). Situating preparedness education within public pedagogy. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 1366(November), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2016.1200660 Kousky, C. (2016). Impacts of natural disasters on children. Future of Children, 26(1), 73–92. https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2016.0004 Latif, M., Zukhairina, Zubaidah, R., & Afandi, M. (2013). Orientasi Baru Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini (Teori dan Aplikasi). Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group. Lin, R. (2012). A Study of Curriculum Innovation Teaching and Creative Thinking for Picture Book Creation. IERI Procedia, Vol. 2, pp. 30–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ieri.2012.06.047 Lopez, Y., Hayden, J., Cologon, K., & Hadley, F. (2012). Child participation and disaster risk reduction. International Journal of Early Years Education, 20(3), 300–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2012.716712 Manjale, N. B., & Abel, C. (2017). Significance and adequacy of instructional media as perceived by primary school pupils and teachers in. 4(6), 151–157. Masuda, K., & Yamauchi, C. (2017). The effects of female education on adolescent pregnancy and child health: evidence from Uganda’s Universal Primary Education for fully treated cohorts. GRIPS Discussion Paper - National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, (17/01), 49-pp. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/07f5/ebe91e3ac20179daae7d885ea50f8154f94e.pdf Mateo, R. M. (2015). Contrastive Multimodal Analysis of two Spanish translations of a picture book. 212, 230–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.338 McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. (2012). Conducting educational design research. London: Routledge. Meng, L., & Muñoz, M. (2016). Teachers’ perceptions of effective teaching: a comparative study of elementary school teachers from China and the USA. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability. Mudavanhu, Chipo Muzenda Manyena, B., & Collins, A. E. (2016). Disaster risk reduction knowledge among children in Muzarabani District, Zimbabwe. Natural Hazards, 84(2), 911–931. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2465-z Mutch, C. (2014). International Journal of Educational Development The role of schools in disaster settings : Learning from the 2010 – 2011 New Zealand earthquakes. International Journal of Educational Development. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2014.06.008 Ozturk, M. B., Sendogdu, M. C., Seker, E., & Tekinsen, H. K. (2011). Parents with children in preschool children ’ s picture book review elections. 15, 1906–1910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.025 Peek, L. (2008). Children and Disasters: Understanding Vulnerability, Developing Capacities, and Promoting Resilience - An Introduction. Children, Youth and Environments, 18(1), 1– 29. Plomp, T., & Nieveen, N. (2007). An introduction to educational design research. Enschede: The Netherlands: SLO. Pramitasari, M., Yetti, E., & Hapidin. (2018). Pengembangan Media Sliding Book Untuk Media Pengenalan Sains Kehidupan (Life Science) Kelautan untuk Anak Usia Dini. Jurnal Pendidikan Usia Dini, 12(November), 281–290. Proulx, K., & Aboud, F. (2019). Disaster risk reduction in early childhood education: Effects on preschool quality and child outcomes. International Journal of Educational Development, 66(October 2017), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2019.01.007 Pyle, A., & Danniels, E. (2016). Using a picture book to gain assent in research with young children. 4430(March). https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2015.1100175 Raj, A., & Kasi, S. (2015). International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction Psychosocial disaster preparedness for school children by teachers. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 12, 119–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2014.12.007 Raynaudo, G., & Peralta, O. (2019). Children learning a concept with a book and an e-book: a comparison with matched instruction. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 34(1), 87–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-018-0370-4 Sawyer, B., Atkins-burnett, S., Sandilos, L., Hammer, C. S., Lopez, L., Blair, C., ... Hammer, C. S. (2018). Variations in Classroom Language Environments of Preschool Children Who Are Low Income and Linguistically Diverse. Early Education and Development, 29(3), 398– 416. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2017.1408373 Simcock, G., & Heron-delaney, M. (2016). Infant Behavior and Development Brief report Reality check : Prior exposure facilitates picture book imitation by 15-month-old infants. Infant Behavior and Development, 45, 140–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2016.09.003 Solfiah, Y., Risma, D., & Kurnia, R. (2019). The Knowledge Of Early Childhood Education Teachers About Natural Disaster Management. 2(1), 159–166. Sugiyono. (2017). Metode Penelitian dan pengembangan, untuk bidang pendidikan,manegement sosial. Bandung: alfabeta. Sumantri, M. S. (2015). Strategi Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.Suryaningsih, E., & Fatmawati, L. (2017). Pengembangan BUku Cerita Bergambar Tentang Mitigasi Bencana Erupsi Gunung Api Untuk Siswa SD. Profesi Pendidikan Dasar. Tatebe, J., & Mutch, C. (2015). International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction Perspectives on education , children and young people in disaster risk reduction. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.06.011 Tomé-Fernández, M., Senís-Fernández, J., & Ruiz-Martín, D. (2019). Values and Intercultural Experiences Through Picture Books. Reading Teacher, 73(2), 205–213. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1813 Torani, S., Majd, P. M., Maroufi, S. S., Dowlati, M., & Sheikhi, R. A. (2019). The importance of education on disasters and emergencies: A review article. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, Vol. 8, p. 85. https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_262_18 Tuladhar, G., Yatabe, R., Bhandary, N., & Dahal, R. (2015). Assessment of disaster risk reduction knowledge of school teachers in Nepal. International Journal of Health System and Disaster Management, 3(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.4103/2347-9019.147142 Undang-undang No. 24 Tahun 2007 Tentang Penanggulangan Bencana , (2007).

In recent years, STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, and Mathematics) has received wide attention. STEAM complements early childhood learning needs in honing 2nd century skills. This study aims to introduce a loose section in early childhood learning to pre-service teachers and then to explore their perceptions of how to use loose parts in supporting STEAM. The study design uses qualitative phenomenological methods. FGDs (Focus Group Discussions) are used as data collection instruments. The findings point to two main themes that emerged from the discussion: a loose section that supports freedom of creation and problem solving. Freedom clearly supports science, mathematics and arts education while problem solving significantly supports engineering and technology education. Keywords: Early Childhood Educators, Loose-part, STEAM References: Allen, A. (2016). Don’t Fear STEM: You Already Teach It! Exchange, (231), 56–59. Ansberry, B. K., & Morgan, E. (2019). Seven Myths of STEM. 56(6), 64–67. Bagiati, A., & Evangelou, D. (2015). Engineering curriculum in the preschool classroom: the teacher’s experience. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(1), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2014.991099 Becker, K., & Park, K. (2011). Effects of integrative approaches among science , technology , engineering , and mathematics ( STEM ) subjects on students ’ learning : A preliminary meta-analysis. 12(5), 23–38. Berk, L. E. (2009). Child Development (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education. Can, B., Yildiz-Demirtas, V., & Altun, E. (2017). The Effect of Project-based Science Education Programme on Scientific Process Skills and Conception of Kindergargen Students. 16(3), 395–413. Casey, T., Robertson, J., Abel, J., Cairns, M., Caldwell, L., Campbell, K., … Robertson, T. (2016). Loose Parts Play. Edinburgh. Cheung, R. H. P. (2017). Teacher-directed versus child-centred : the challenge of promoting creativity in Chinese preschool classrooms. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 1366(January), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2016.1217253 Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2016). Math, Science, and Technology in the Early Grades. The Future of Children, 26(2), 75–94. Cloward Drown, K. (2014). Dramatic lay affordances of natural and manufactured outdoor settings for preschoolaged children. Dejarnette, N. K. (2018). Early Childhood Steam: Reflections From a Year of Steam Initiatives Implemented in a High-Needs Primary School. Education, 139(2), 96–112. DiGironimo, N. (2011). What is technology? Investigating student conceptions about the nature of technology. International Journal of Science Education, 33(10), 1337–1352. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.495400 Dugger, W. E., & Naik, N. (2001). Clarifying Misconceptions between Technology Education and Educational Technology. The Technology Teacher, 61(1), 31–35. Eeuwijk, P. Van, & Zuzana, A. (2017). How to Conduct a Focus Group Discussion ( FGD ) Methodological Manual. Flannigan, C., & Dietze, B. (2018). Children, Outdoor Play, and Loose Parts. Journal of Childhood Studies, 42(4), 53–60. https://doi.org/10.18357/jcs.v42i4.18103 Fleer, M. (1998). The Preparation of Australian Teachers in Technology Education : Developing The Preparation of Australian Teachers in Technology Education : Developing Professionals Not Technicians. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education & Development, 1(2), 25–31. Freitas, H., Oliveira, M., Jenkins, M., & Popjoy, O. (1998). The focus group, a qualitative research method: Reviewing the theory, and providing guidelines to its planning. In ISRC, Merrick School of Business, University of Baltimore (MD, EUA)(Vol. 1). Gomes, J., & Fleer, M. (2019). The Development of a Scientific Motive : How Preschool Science and Home Play Reciprocally Contribute to Science Learning. Research in Science Education, 49(2), 613–634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9631-5 Goris, T., & Dyrenfurth, M. (n.d.). Students ’ Misconceptions in Science , Technology , and Engineering . Gull, C., Bogunovich, J., Goldstein, S. L., & Rosengarten, T. (2019). Definitions of Loose Parts in Early Childhood Outdoor Classrooms: A Scoping Review. The International Journal of Early Childhood Environmental Education, 6(3), 37. Hui, A. N. N., He, M. W. J., & Ye, S. S. (2015). Arts education and creativity enhancement in young children in Hong Kong. Educational Psychology, 35(3), 315–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.875518 Jarvis, T., & Rennie, L. J. (1996). Perceptions about Technology Held by Primary Teachers in England. Research in Science & Technological Education, 14(1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/0263514960140104 Jeffers, O. (2004). How to Catch a Star. New York: Philomel Books. Kiewra, C., & Veselack, E. (2016). Playing with nature: Supporting preschoolers’ creativity in natural outdoor classrooms. International Journal of Early Childhood Environmental Education, 4(1), 70–95. Kuh, L., Ponte, I., & Chau, C. (2013). The impact of a natural playscape installation on young children’s play behaviors. Children, Youth and Environments, 23(2), 49–77. Lachapelle, C. P., Cunningham, C. M., & Oh, Y. (2019). What is technology? Development and evaluation of a simple instrument for measuring children’s conceptions of technology. International Journal of Science Education, 41(2), 188–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1545101 Liamputtong. (2010). Focus Group Methodology : Introduction and History. In Focus Group MethodoloGy (pp. 1–14). Liao, C. (2016). From Interdisciplinary to Transdisciplinary: An Arts-Integrated Approach to STEAM Education. 69(6), 44–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2016.1224873 Lindeman, K. W., & Anderson, E. M. (2015). Using Blocks to Develop 21st Century Skills. Young Children, 70(1), 36–43. Maxwell, L., Mitchell, M., and Evans, G. (2008). Effects of play equipment and loose parts on preschool children’s outdoor play behavior: An observational study and design intervention. Children, Youth and Environments, 18(2), 36–63. McClure, E., Guernsey, L., Clements, D., Bales, S., Nichols, J., Kendall-Taylor, N., & Levine, M. (2017). How to Integrate STEM Into Early Childhood Education. Science and Children, 055(02), 8–11. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/sc17_055_02_8 McClure, M., Tarr, P., Thompson, C. M., & Eckhoff, A. (2017). Defining quality in visual art education for young children: Building on the position statement of the early childhood art educators. Arts Education Policy Review, 118(3), 154–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2016.1245167 Mishra, L. (2016). Focus Group Discussion in Qualitative Research. TechnoLearn: An International Journal of Educational Technology, 6(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.5958/2249-5223.2016.00001.2 Monhardt, L., & Monhardt, R. (2006). Creating a context for the learning of science process skills through picture books. Early Childhood Education Journal, 34(1), 67–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-006-0108-9 Monsalvatge, L., Long, K., & DiBello, L. (2013). Turning our world of learning inside out! Dimensions of Early Childhood, 41(3), 23–30. Moomaw, S. (2012). STEM begins in the early years. School Science & Mathematics, 112(2), 57–58. Moomaw, S. (2016). Move Back the Clock, Educators: STEM Begins at Birth. School Science & Mathematics, 116(5), 237–238. Moomaw, S., & Davis, J. A. (2010). STEM Comes to Preschool. Young Cihildren, 12–18(September), 12–18. Munawar, M., Roshayanti, F., & Sugiyanti. (2019). Implementation of STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, Mathematics)-Based Early Childhood Education Learning in Semarang City. Jurnal CERIA, 2(5), 276–285. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. Nicholson, S. (1972). The Theory of Loose Parts: An important principle for design methodology. Studies in Design Education Craft & Technology, 4(2), 5–12. O.Nyumba, T., Wilson, K., Derrick, C. J., & Mukherjee, N. (2018). The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9(1), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12860 Padilla-Diaz, M. (2015). Phenomenology in Educational Qualitative Research : Philosophy as Science or Philosophical Science ? International Journal of Educational Excellence, 1(2), 101–110. Padilla, M. J. (1990). The Science Process Skills. Research Matters - to the Science Teacher, 1(March), 1–3. Park, D. Y., Park, M. H., & Bates, A. B. (2018). Exploring Young Children’s Understanding About the Concept of Volume Through Engineering Design in a STEM Activity: A Case Study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(2), 275–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9776-0 Rahardjo, M. M. (2019). Implementasi Pendekatan Saintifik Sebagai Pembentuk Keterampilan Proses Sains Anak Usia Dini. Scholaria: Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan, 9(2), 148–159. https://doi.org/10.24246/j.js.2019.v9.i2.p148-159 Robison, T. (2016). Male Elementary General Music Teachers : A Phenomenological Study. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 26(2), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083715622019 Rocha Fernandes, G. W., Rodrigues, A. M., & Ferreira, C. A. (2018). Conceptions of the Nature of Science and Technology: a Study with Children and Youths in a Non-Formal Science and Technology Education Setting. Research in Science Education, 48(5), 1071–1106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9599-6 Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Educating for innovation. 1(2006), 41–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2005.08.001 Sharapan, H. (2012). ERIC - From STEM to STEAM: How Early Childhood Educators Can Apply Fred Rogers’ Approach, Young Children, 2012-Jan. Young Children, 67(1), 36–40. Siantayani, Y. (2018). STEAM: Science-Technology-Engineering-Art-Mathematics. Semarang: SINAU Teachers Development Center. Sikder, S., & Fleer, M. (2015). Small Science : Infants and Toddlers Experiencing Science in Everyday Family Life. Research in Science Education, 45(3), 445–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9431-0 Smith-gilman, S. (2018). The Arts, Loose Parts and Conversations. Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 16(1), 90–103. Sohn, B. K., Thomas, S. P., Greenberg, K. H., & Pollio, H. R. (2017). Hearing the Voices of Students and Teachers : A Phenomenological Approach to Educational Research. Qualitative Research in Education, 6(2), 121–148. https://doi.org/10.17583/qre.2017.2374 Strong-wilson, T., & Ellis, J. (2002). Children and Place : Reggio Emilia’s Environment as Third Teacher. Theory into Practice, 46(1), 40–47. Sutton, M. J. (2011). In the hand and mind: The intersection of loose parts and imagination in evocative settings for young children. Children, Youth and Environments, 21(2), 408–424. Tippett, C. D., & Milford, T. M. (2017). Findings from a Pre-kindergarten Classroom: Making the Case for STEM in Early Childhood Education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15, 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9812-8 Tippett, C., & Milford, T. (2017). STEM Resources and Materials for Engaging Learning Experiences. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 15(March), 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9812-8 Veselack, E., Miller, D., & Cain-Chang, L. (2015). Raindrops on noses and toes in the dirt: infants and toddlers in the outdoor classroom. Dimensions Educational Research Foundation. Yuksel-Arslan, P., Yildirim, S., & Robin, B. R. (2016). A phenomenological study : teachers ’ experiences of using digital storytelling in early childhood education. Educational Studies, 42(5), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2016.1195717

SummaryThe autonomy of the students refers to the control that the student has in the learning process, to decide on the content, the goals and the way of learning and is connected with the concepts of self-direction and self-regulation. The concept of autonomy presupposes the development of a psychological relationship with the process and the content of the learning act, while the autonomous student is able to make decisions, to distance himself but also to reflect critically. Autonomy is related to the notion of personal responsibility that the learner assumes in his learning process, while two dimensions are distinguished. The first is autonomous learning, in which the learner assumes responsibility for the design, organization and evaluation of the educational process, which concerns its external characteristics. The second is the autonomous student, which refers to the internal characteristics of the learner. However, an important factor for the autonomy of the students is considered to be the context in which the educational process takes place, ie when the general socio-political and learning context encourages the learners to take responsibility for their learning, then their autonomy is promoted.In the context of distance education, students are at a distance from their teachers, their classmates and the institution that provides education, but they are called to meet the requirements of the study program they choose. And while the concept of autonomy is intertwined with the method of distance education, the factors that hinder its realization have not been sufficiently explored. This empirical research, therefore, comes to fill the gap in the literature on the obstacles that students themselves face in the realization of autonomy.This paper explores the barriers faced by distance education students in achieving their autonomy. In particular, it focuses on exploring the obstacles that students face with regard to autonomy in distance education and the factors that contribute to removing the obstacles to student autonomy in distance education. The quantitative approach was chosen and the tool of our research was the online questionnaire, which was completed by 215 research participants, postgraduate and undergraduate students of the Hellenic Open University. The selection of the sample was random sampling as the questionnaire was published on a social networking page (facebook) in specific groups formed by the Hellenic Open University students and the participants chose to answer and complete the questionnaire. The empirical research took place in March - April 2019.The questionnaire included two axes. The first axis concerned demographic data. The second axis included twenty-one (21) questions that answered the research questions. Seventeen (17) of the questions were closed-ended, graded Likert scale, one (1) question with answer options, while three (3) questions were open-ended. Open-ended questions were included in order for participants to express their views on the obstacles they face, and to enrich the data from the closed-ended questions.For the analysis of the data collected from the closed-ended questions of the questionnaire, the statistical program SPSS and the descriptive statistics were used. Regarding the data of the open-ended questions, after their inclusion in broader categories, the next step was to codify the conversion of the data from nominal to numerical. In order to identify any differences in the answers of the participants, depending on the gender and the level of studies, correlations were used.The theoretical framework of the present study is closely related to the empirical research carried out. Obstacles to the autonomy of distance learning students identified in the theoretical part are confirmed by the empirical research, with the difference that the empirical research has shown that students' personal characteristics as well as the "distance" factor do not constitute a significant obstacle to the realization of their autonomy.However, the empirical research also revealed several factors that were not identified in the bibliographic review as barriers to student autonomy, such as inadequate administrative organization, financial factors, the small number of group meetings, the lack of different types of papers, exams based on memorization and exams with books closed. It is also worth noting that while the majority of students consider that they have developed skills in order to be autonomous, they agree that a preparatory course that would prepare them for the requirements of distance education would be very helpful. The analysis and discussion of the results highlighted the prominent role of the teacher in distance education, as the lack of support for students can impede their autonomy, however, the teacher has the potential to contribute to its realization by guiding and encouraging students. The multidimensional role of the teacher in distance education also emerges from our research, as described in the theoretical part of our work, since the participants expressed the need for teachers combining a number of characteristics in order to promote their autonomy.Another important finding of the research is that students feel their personal characteristics and personal abilities can help them realize their autonomy. In line with the bibliographic review, the factors that are an obstacle to the autonomy of the students of distance education, as well as the factors contributing to the removal of these obstacles, are related both to the students themselves and to the educational process.As for the factors that contribute to the removal of barriers to the autonomy of distance learning students, they coincide with the factors that have a positive effect on the realization of autonomy and have been identified in the theoretical framework of our work. The most important factor is the personal characteristics of the students themselves and their own personal effort. Following, the support, guidance from the teacher on a psychological and practical level and communication with him. Also very important factors are the existence of appropriate educational material and the conduct of group meetings, which students ask to be more frequent.The need for a digital learning framework to promote student autonomy, as found in the theoretical framework, is confirmed by the empirical research, as well as the need for electronic group meetings and the use of electronic libraries, access to specialized digital material, and easier access to the Hellenic Open University platforms.A very important factor in removing the barriers to student autonomy as it emerged from the empirical research is more flexible schedules concerning the delivery of papers, while access to educational material and a better administrative organization are also considered important.Regarding the correlation of the curriculum with the factors that constitute an obstacle to autonomy, the majority of postgraduate and undergraduate students agree with some differentiation regarding the factors "comments of the teacher on written work", "educational material", "psychological support from the teacher ”and“ lack of psychological support from the teacher” while gender did not appear to have any particular effect on the factors that impede students’ autonomy

Introduction The exhibition of an artist’s work is traditionally accepted as representing the final stage of the creative process (Staniszewski). This article asks, however, whether this traditional view can be reassessed so that the curatorial practice of mounting an exhibition becomes, itself, a creative outcome feeding into work that may still be in progress, and that simultaneously operates as a learning and teaching tool. To provide a preliminary examination of the issue, we use a single case study approach, taking an example of practice currently used at an Australian university. In this program, internal and external students work together to develop and deliver an exhibition of their own work in progress. The exhibition space has a professional website (‘CQUniversity Noosa Exhibition Space’), many community members and the local media attend exhibition openings, and the exhibition (which runs for three to four weeks) becomes an outcome students can include in their curriculum vitae. This article reflects on the experiences, challenges, and outcomes that have been gained through this process over the past twelve months. Due to this time frame, the case study is exploratory and its findings are provisional. The case study is an appropriate method to explore a small sample of events (in this case exhibitions) as, following Merriam, it allows the construction of a richer picture of an under-examined phenomenon to be constructed. Although it is clear that this approach will not offer results which can be generalised, it can, nevertheless, assist in opening up a field for investigation and constructing a holistic account of a phenomenon (in this case, the exhibition space as authentic learning experience and productive teaching tool), for, as Merriam states, “much can be learned from a particular case” (51). Jennings adds that even the smallest case study is useful as it includes an “in-depth examination of the subject with which to confirm or contest received generalizations” (14). Donmoyer extends thoughts on this, suggesting that the single case study is extremely useful as the “restricted conception of generalizability … solely in terms of sampling and statistical significance is no longer defensible or functional” (45). Using the available student course feedback, anonymous end-of-term course evaluations, and other available information, this case study account offers an example of what Merriam terms a “narrative description” (51), which seeks to offer readers the opportunity to engage and “learn vicariously from an encounter with the case” (Merriam 51) in question. This may, we propose, be particularly productive for other educators since what is “learn[ed] in a particular case can be transferred to similar situations” (Merriam 51). Breaking Ground exhibition, CQUniversity Noosa Exhibition Space, 2014. Photo by Ulrike Sturm. Background The Graduate Certificate of Creative Industries (Creative Practice) (CQU ‘CB82’) was developed in 2011 to meet the national Australian Quality Framework agency’s Level 8 (Graduate Certificate) standards in terms of what is called in their policies, the “level” of learning. This states that, following the program, graduates from this level of program “will have advanced knowledge and skills for professional or highly skilled work and/or further learning … [and] will apply knowledge and skills to demonstrate autonomy, well-developed judgment, adaptability and responsibility as a practitioner or learner” (AQF). The program was first delivered in 2012 and, since then, has been offered both two and three terms a year, attracting small numbers of students each term, with an average of 8 to 12 students a term. To meet these requirements, such programs are sometimes developed to provide professional and work-integrated learning tasks and learning outcomes for students (Patrick et al., Smith et al.). In this case, professionally relevant and related tasks and outcomes formed the basis for the program, its learning tasks, and its assessment regime. To this end, each student enrolled in this program works on an individual, self-determined (but developed in association with the teaching team and with feedback from peers) creative/professional project that is planned, developed, and delivered across one term of study for full- time students and two terms for part- timers. In order to ensure the AQF-required professional-level outcomes, many projects are designed and/or developed in partnership with professional arts institutions and community bodies. Partnerships mobilised utilised in this way have included those with local, state, and national bodies, including the local arts community, festivals, and educational support programs, as well as private business and community organisations. Student interaction with curation occurs regularly at art schools, where graduate and other student shows are scheduled as a regular events on the calendar of most tertiary art schools (Al-Amri), and the curated exhibition as an outcome has a longstanding tradition in tertiary fine arts education (Webb, Brien, and Burr). Yet in these cases, it is ultimately the creative work on show that is the focus of the learning experience and assessment process, rather than any focus on engagement with the curatorial process itself (Dally et al.). When art schools do involve students in the curatorial process, the focus usually still remains on the students' creative work (Sullivan). Another interaction with curation is when students undertaking a tertiary-level course or program in museum, and/or curatorial practice are engaged in the process of developing, mounting, and/or critiquing curated activities. These programs are, however, very small in number in Australia, where they are only offered at postgraduate level, with the exception of an undergraduate program at the University of Canberra (‘215JA.2’). By adopting “the exhibition” as a component of the learning process rather than its end product, including documentation of students’ work in progress as exhibition pieces, and incorporating it into a more general creative industries focused program, we argue that the curatorial experience can become an interactive learning platform for students ranging from diverse creative disciplines. The Student Experience Students in the program under consideration in this case study come from a wide spectrum of the creative industries, including creative writing, film, multimedia, music, and visual arts. Each term, at least half of the enrolments are distance students. The decision to establish an on-campus exhibition space was an experimental strategy that sought to bring together students from different creative disciplines and diverse locations, and actively involve them in the exhibition development and curatorial process. As well as their individual project work, the students also bring differing levels of prior professional experience to the program, and exhibit a wide range of learning styles and approaches when developing and completing their creative works and exegetical reflections. To cater for the variations listed above, but still meet the program milestones and learning outcomes that must (under the program rules) remain consistent for each student, we employed a multi-disciplinary approach to teaching that included strategies informed by Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences (Gardner, Frames of Mind), which proposed and defined seven intelligences, and repeatedly criticised what he identified as an over-reliance on linguistic and logical indices as identifiers of intelligence. He asserted that these were traditional indicators of high scores on most IQ measures or tests of achievement but were not representative of overall levels of intelligence. Gardner later reinforced that, “unless individuals take a very active role in what it is that they’re studying, unless they learn to ask questions, to do things hands on, to essentially re-create things in their own mind and transform them as is needed, the ideas just disappear” (Edutopia). In alignment with Gardner’s views, we have noted that students enrolled in the program demonstrate strengths in several key intelligence areas, particularly interpersonal, musical, body-kinaesthetic, and spacial/visual intelligences (see Gardner, ‘Multiple Intelligences’, 8–18). To cater for, and further develop, these strengths, and also for the external students who were unable to attend university-based workshop sessions, we developed a range of resources with various approaches to hands-on creative tasks that related to the projects students were completing that term. These resources included the usual scholarly articles, books, and textbooks but were also sourced from the print and online media, guest speaker presentations, and digital sites such as You Tube and TED Talks, and through student input into group discussions. The positive reception of these individual project-relevant resources is evidenced in the class online discussion forums, where consecutive groups of students have consistently reflected on the positive impact these resources have had on their individual creative projects: This has been a difficult week with many issues presenting. As part of our Free Writing exercise in class, we explored ‘brain dumping’ and wrote anything (no matter how ridiculous) down. The great thing I discovered after completing this task was that by allowing myself to not censor my thoughts by compiling a writing masterpiece, I was indeed “free” to express everything. …. … I understand that this may not have been the original intended goal of Free Writing – but it is something I would highly recommend external students to try and see if it works for you (Student 'A', week 5, term 1 2015, Moodle reflection point). I found our discussion about crowdfunding particularly interesting. ... I intend to look at this model for future exhibitions. I think it could be a great way for me to look into developing an exhibition of paintings alongside some more commercial collateral such as prints and cards (Student 'B', week 6, term 1 2015, Moodle reflection point). In class I specifically enjoyed the black out activity and found the online videos exceptional, inspiring and innovating. I really enjoyed this activity and it was something that I can take away and use within the classroom when educating (Student 'C', week 8, term 1 2015, Moodle reflection point). The application of Gardner’s principles and strategies dovetailed with our framework for assessing learning outcomes, where we were guided by Boud’s seven propositions for assessment reform in higher education, which aim to “set directions for change, designed to enhance learning achievements for all students and improve the quality of their experience” (26). Boud asserts that assessment has most effect when: it is used to engage students in productive learning; feedback is used to improve student learning; students and teachers become partners in learning and assessment; students are inducted into the assessment practices of higher education; assessment and learning are placed at the centre of subject and program design; assessment and learning is a focus for staff and institutional development; and, assessment provides inclusive and trustworthy representation of student achievement. These propositions were integral to the design of learning outcomes for the exhibition. Teachers worked with students, individually and as a group, to build their capacity to curate the exhibition, and this included such things as the design and administration of invitations, and also the physical placement of works within the exhibition space. In this way, teachers and students became partners in the process of assessment. The final exhibition, as a learning outcome, meant that students were engaged in productive learning that placed both assessment and knowledge at the centre of subject and project design. It is a collation of creative pieces that embodies the class, as a whole; however, each piece also represents the skills and creativity of individual students and, in this way, are is a trustworthy representations of student achievement. While we aimed to employ all seven recommendations, our main focus was on ensuring that the exhibition, as an authentic learning experience, was productive and that the students were engaged as responsible and accountable co-facilitators of it. These factors are particularly relevant as almost all the students were either currently working, or planning to work, in their chosen creative field, where the work would necessarily involve both publication, performance, and/or exhibition of their artwork plus collaborative practice across disciplinary boundaries to make this happen (Brien). For this reason, we provided exhibition-related coursework tasks that we hoped were engaging and that also represented an authentic learning outcome for the students. Student Curatorship In this context, the opportunity to exhibit their own works-in-progress provided an authentic reason, with a deadline, for students to both work, and reflect, on their creative projects. The documentation of each student’s creative process was showcased as a stand-alone exhibition piece within the display. These exhibits not only served not only to highlight the different learning styles of each student, but also proved to inspire creativity and skill development. They also provided a working model whereby students (and potential enrollees) could view other students’ work and creative processes from inception to fully-realised project outcomes. The sample online reflections quoted above not only highlight the effectiveness of the online content delivery, but this engagement with the online forum also allowed remote students to comment on each other’s projects as well as to and respond to issues they were encountering in their project planning and development and creative practice. It was essential that this level of peer engagement was fostered for the curatorial project to be viable, as both internal and external students are involved in designing the invitation, catalogue, labels, and design of the space, while on-campus students hang and label work according to the group’s directions. Distance students send in items. This is a key point of this experiment: the process of curating an exhibition of work from diverse creative fields, and from students located thousands of kilometres apart, as a way of bringing cohesion to a diverse cohort of students. That cohesiveness provided an opportunity for authentic learning to occur because it was in relation to a task that each student apparently understood as personally, academically, and professionally relevant. This was supported by the anonymous course evaluation comments, which were overwhelmingly positive about the exhibition process – there were no negative comments regarding this aspect of the program, and over 60 per cent of the class supplied these evaluations. This also met a considerable point of anxiety in the current university environment whereby actively engaging students in online learning interactions is a continuing issue (Dixon, Dixon, and Axmann). A key question is: what relevance does this curatorial process have for a student whose field is not visual art, but, for instance, music, film, or writing? By displaying documentation of work in progress, this process connects students of all disciplines with an audience. For example, one student in 2014 who was a singer/songwriter, had her song available to be played on a laptop, alongside photographs of the studio when she was recording her song with her band. In conjunction with this, the cover artwork for her CD, together with the actual CD and CD cover, were framed and exhibited. Another student, who was also a musician but who was completing a music history project, sent in pages of the music transcriptions he had been working on during the course. This manuscript was bound and exhibited in a way that prompted some audience members to commented that it was like an artist’s book as well as a collection of data. Both of these students lived over 1,000 kilometres from the campus where the exhibition was held, but they were able to share with us as teaching staff, as well as with other students who were involved in the physical setting up of the exhibition, exactly how they envisaged their work being displayed. The feedback from both of these students was that this experience gave them a strong connection to the program. They described how, despite the issue of distance, they had had the opportunity to participate in a professional event that they were very keen to include on their curricula vitae. Another aspect of students actively participating in the curation of an exhibition which features work from diverse disciplines is that these students get a true sense of the collaborative interconnectedness of the disciplines of the creative industries (Brien). By way of example, the exhibit of the singer/songwriter referred to above involved not only the student and her band, but also the photographer who took the photographs, and the artist who designed the CD cover. Students collaboratively decided how this material was handled in the exhibition catalogue – all these names were included and their roles described. Breaking Ground exhibition, CQUniversity Noosa Exhibition Space, 2014. Photo by Ulrike Sturm. Outcomes and Conclusion We believe that the curation of an exhibition and the delivery of its constituent components raises student awareness that they are, as creatives, part of a network of industries, developing in them a genuine understanding of the way the creating industries works as a profession outside the academic setting. It is in this sense that this curatorial task is an authentic learning experience. In fact, what was initially perceived as a significant challenge—, that is, exhibiting work in progress from diverse creative fields—, has become a strength of the curatorial project. In reflecting on the experiences and outcomes that have occurred through the implementation of this example of curatorial practice, both as a learning tool and as a creative outcome in its own right, a key positive indicator for this approach is the high level of student satisfaction with the course, as recorded in the formal, anonymous university student evaluations (with 60–100 per cent of these completed for each term, when the university benchmark is 50 per cent completion), and the high level of professional outcomes achieved post-completion. The university evaluation scores have been in the top (4.5–5/.5) range for satisfaction over the program’s eight terms of delivery since 2012. Particularly in relation to subsequent professional outcomes, anecdotal feedback has been that the curatorial process served as an authentic and engaged learning experience because it equipped the students, now graduates, of the program with not only knowledge about how exhibitions work, but also a genuine understanding of the web of connections between the diverse creative arts and industries. Indeed, a number of students have submitted proposals to exhibit professionally in the space after graduation, again providing anecdotal feedback that the experience they gained through our model has had a sustaining impact on their creative practice. While the focus of this activity has been on creative learning for the students, it has also provided an interesting and engaging teaching experience for us as the program’s staff. We will continue to gather evidence relating to our model, and, with the next iteration of the exhibition project, a more detailed comparative analysis will be attempted. At this stage, with ethics approval, we plan to run an anonymous survey with all students involved in this activity, to develop questions for a focus group discussion with graduates. We are also in the process of contacting alumni of the program regarding professional outcomes to map these one, two, and five years after graduation. We will also keep a record of what percentage of students apply to exhibit in the space after graduation, as this will also be an additional marker of how professional and useful they perceive the experience to be. In conclusion, it can be stated that the 100 per cent pass rate and 0 per cent attrition rate from the program since its inception, coupled with a high level (over 60 per cent) of student progression to further post-graduate study in the creative industries, has not been detrimentally affected by this curatorial experiment, and has encouraged staff to continue with this approach. References Al-Amri, Mohammed. “Assessment Techniques Practiced in Teaching Art at Sultan Qaboos University in Oman.” International Journal of Education through Art 7.3 (2011): 267–282. AQF Levels. Australian Qualifications Framework website. 18 June 2015 ‹http://www.aqf.edu.au/aqf/in-detail/aqf-levels/›. Boud, D. Student Assessment for Learning in and after Courses: Final Report for Senior Fellowship. Sydney: Australian Learning and Teaching Council, 2010. Brien, Donna Lee, “Higher Education in the Corporate Century: Choosing Collaborative rather than Entrepreneurial or Competitive Models.” New Writing: The International Journal for the Practice and Theory of Creative Writing 4.2 (2007): 157–170. Brien, Donna Lee, and Axel Bruns, eds. “Collaborate.” M/C Journal 9.2 (2006). 18 June 2015 ‹http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0605›. Burton, D. Exhibiting Student Art: The Essential Guide for Teachers. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, New York, 2006. CQUniversity. CB82 Graduate Certificate in Creative Industries. 18 July 2015 ‹https://handbook.cqu.edu.au/programs/index?programCode=CB82›. CQUniversity Noosa Exhibition Space. 20 July 2015 ‹http://www.cqunes.org›. Dally, Kerry, Allyson Holbrook, Miranda Lawry and Anne Graham. “Assessing the Exhibition and the Exegesis in Visual Arts Higher Degrees: Perspectives of Examiners.” Working Papers in Art & Design 3 (2004). 27 June 2015 ‹http://sitem.herts.ac.uk/artdes_research/papers/wpades/vol3/kdabs.html›. Degree Shows, Sydney College of the Arts. 2014. 18 June 2015 ‹http://sydney.edu.au/sca/galleries-events/degree-shows/index.shtml› Dixon, Robert, Kathryn Dixon, and Mandi Axmann. “Online Student Centred Discussion: Creating a Collaborative Learning Environment.” Hello! Where Are You in the Landscape of Educational Technology? Proceedings ASCILITE, Melbourne 2008. 256–264. Donmoyer, Robert. “Generalizability and the Single-Case Study.” Case Study Method: Key Issues, Key Texts. Eds. Roger Gomm, Martyn Hammersley, and Peter Foster. 2000. 45–68. Falk, J.H. “Assessing the Impact of Exhibit Arrangement on Visitor Behavior and Learning.” Curator: The Museum Journal 36.2 (1993): 133–146. Flyvbjerg, Bent. “Five Misunderstandings about Case-Study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12.2 (2006): 219–245. Gardner, H. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, New York: Basic Books, 1983. ———. Multiple Intelligences: New Horizons in Theory and Practice, New York: Basic Books, 2006. George Lucas Education Foundation. 2015 Edutopia – What Works in Education. 16 June 2015 ‹http://www.edutopia.org/multiple-intelligences-howard-gardner-video#graph3›. Gerring, John. “What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good For?” American Political Science Review 98.02 (2004): 341–354. Hooper-Greenhill, Eilean. “Museums and Communication: An Introductory Essay.” Museum, Media, Message 1 (1995): 1. Jennings, Paul. The Public House in Bradford, 1770-1970. Keele: Keele University Press, 1995. Levy, Jack S. “Case Studies: Types, Designs, and Logics of Inference.” Conflict Management and Peace Science 25.1 (2008): 1–18. Merriam, Sharan B. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation: Revised and Expanded from Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. Jossey-Bass, 2009. Miles, M., and S. Rainbird. From Critical Distance to Engaged Proximity: Rethinking Assessment Methods to Enhance Interdisciplinary Collaborative Learning in the Creative Arts and Humanities. Final Report to the Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching, Sydney. 2013. Monash University. Rethinking Assessment to Enhance Interdisciplinary Collaborative Learning in the Creative Arts and Humanities. Sydney: Office of Learning and Teaching, 2013. Muller, L. Reflective Curatorial Practice. 17 June 2015 ‹http://research.it.uts.edu.au/creative/linda/CCSBook/Jan%2021%20web%20pdfs/Muller.pdf›. O’Neill, Paul. Curating Subjects. London: Open Editions, 2007. Patrick, Carol-Joy, Deborah Peach, Catherine Pocknee, Fleur Webb, Marty Fletcher, and Gabriella Pretto. The WIL (Work Integrated Learning) Report: A National Scoping Study [Final Report]. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology, 2008. Rule, A.C. “Editorial: The Components of Authentic Learning.” Journal of Authentic Learning 3.1 (2006): 1–10. Seawright, Jason, and John Gerring. “Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options.” Political Research Quarterly 61.2 (2008): 294–308. Smith, Martin, Sally Brooks, Anna Lichtenberg, Peter McIlveen, Peter Torjul, and Joanne Tyler. Career Development Learning: Maximising the Contribution of Work-Integrated Learning to the Student Experience. Final project report, June 2009. Wollongong: University of Wollongong, 2009. Sousa, D.A. How the Brain Learns: A Teacher’s Guide. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2001. Stake, R. “Qualitative Case Studies”. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. Eds. N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005. 433-466. Staniszewski, Mary Anne. The Power of Display: A History of Exhibition Installations at the Museum of Modern Art. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1998. Sullivan, Graeme. Art Practice as Research: Inquiry in Visual Arts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2010. University of Canberra. “Bachelor of Heritage, Museums and Conservation (215JA.2)”. Web. 27 July 2015. Ventzislavov, R. “Idle Arts: Reconsidering the Curator.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 72.1 (2014): 83–93. Verschuren, P. “Case Study as a Research Strategy: Some Ambiguities and Opportunities.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 6.2 (2003): 121–139. Webb, Jen, and Donna Lee Brien. “Preparing Graduates for Creative Futures: Australian Creative Arts Programs in a Globalising Society.” Partnerships for World Graduates, AIC (Academia, Industry and Community) 2007 Conference, RMIT, Melbourne, 28–30 Nov. 2007. Webb, Jen, Donna Lee Brien, and Sandra Burr. “Doctoral Examination in the Creative Arts: Process, Practices and Standards.” Final Report. Canberra: Office of Learning and Teaching, 2013. Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2013.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Nevada, Reno, 2005.
"August 2005." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 208-212). Online version available on the World Wide Web. Library also has microfilm. Ann Arbor, Mich. : ProQuest Information and Learning Company, [2005]. 1 microfilm reel ; 35 mm.