Keywords

1 Introduction

Recent aging trends in society, coupled with a falling birth rate, have caused the market to shrink. As a result, many service companies have found it necessary to seek out potential customers who are not their traditional targets. Higher education institutions have faced the same problem; because of the declining population of 18-year-olds, higher education institutions are targeting new types of learner, such as adult learners with full-time jobs. However, these institutions do not necessarily provide the kind of education that satisfies these new types of learner; in fact, they provide them with the same learning environment and tools as are offered to traditional students. To attract new types of learner, higher education institutions must therefore provide education that takes account of learners’ perspectives.

From the viewpoint of services, learners in higher education institutions can be regarded as customers. The value of a service is always perceived and determined by the customer on the basis of value in use [1]. In this sense, the value of an education also need to be determined by learners. In addition, to create value in use, learners need to work as co-producers [1]. Therefore, for the creation of value in education, teachers must provide effective contents, and learners must develop adequate learning behaviors. However, it is difficult for learners to recognize educational value prior to receiving the lecture. Generally, value can be specified in terms of interactions between teacher and learner. For value creation in education, this study aims to support teachers to provide effective contents, and learners to perform adequate learning behaviors. To do so, this study focuses on consensus building between teacher and learner and develops a model to represent a process of consensus building. In addition, we propose a method to determine a strategy for realizing both effective content provision and adequate learning behaviors.

The paper consists of the following sections. Section 2 introduces the approach taken in this study, first by introducing a definition of a service and then by elaborating a process of educational service. Section 3 explains the proposed method for consensus building. Section 4 reports the results of an application of the proposed method to a lecture. Section 5 discusses the results, and Sect. 6 presents our conclusions.

2 Approach of This Study

2.1 Definition of a Service

Service Engineering is a new engineering discipline whose objective is to provide a fundamental understanding of services, as well as concrete engineering methodologies to design and evaluate services. In Service Engineering, “service” is defined as an activity between a service provider and a service receiver to change the state of the receiver [2–4]. Note that the term “service” is used in a broad sense, and so the design target includes both intangible human activities and tangible products.

According to the definition, a receiver is satisfied when their state changes to a new desirable state. Since the value of a service is determined by the receiver, service design should be based on the state change of the receiver. For design purposes, it is necessary to find a method to express state changes of the receiver. In service design, the target receiver’s state is represented as a set of parameters called “receiver state parameters” (RSPs) [2–4]. As shown in Fig. 1, RSPs are changed by “service contents” and “service channels.” Service contents are material, energy, or information that directly changes the receiver’s state. Service channels transfer, amplify, and control the service contents.

Fig. 1.
figure 1

Definition of a service [2–4]

Full size image

2.2 Proposed Educational Process

From the services viewpoint, learners in higher education institutions can be regarded as customers, and the value of an education is therefore determined by learners. In addition, learners work as co-producers in value creation; in other words, while teachers must provide effective contents, learners must perform adequate learning behaviors. In order to realize such an educational service, this study proposes to employ the education process shown in Fig. 2. First, a teacher (corresponding to a contents designer) develops an assumption about value in use for learners. In this study, service is defined as an activity between a service provider and a service receiver that changes the state of the receiver [2–4]. According to this definition, value is represented as state change that is desirable for the receiver. In this step, then, the teacher identifies what constitutes the valuable state for learners, that is, the state in which the value of the education is achieved. On this basis, the teacher designs educational contents and suggests them to the learners. Here, the teacher needs to build a consensus with learners about the educational contents and the value being offered. After building this consensus, the teacher then provides the educational contents and conducts a formative evaluation in order to improve them. Finally, an overall evaluation is conducted.

Fig. 2.
figure 2

Overview of the proposed education process

Full size image

3 A Method for Consensus Building by Using a Learning State Model

3.1 Overview

In order to realize the educational service outlined above, a teacher and a learner need to build a consensus about learning state at each learning stage. Subsequently, the teacher defines learning goals and then determines the instructional and learning behaviors that are required to achieve the learning goals. To this end, the present study focuses on consensus building between teacher and learners, developing a model to represent a process of consensus building. In this model, the process of consensus building is represented as a transition between learning states. This model enables teacher and learner to share an ideal state transition for the learner through agreement of instructional and learning behaviors. In addition, a method is proposed for formulating a strategy for achieving learning goals.

As a perspective on building consensus, this study adopts a model of service value co-creation [5]. The rest of this section introduces the detail of this model. Section 3.2 then explains the proposed learning state model, and Sect. 3.3 proposes a method for formulating a strategy for building consensus about instructional and learning behaviors.

A Model for Service Value Co-creation. Figure 3 illustrates the proposed service model, which includes the co-growth of provider and receiver, along with its driver. A provider proposes a value to a receiver through contents and channels. The receiver perceives the proposed value in a specific context. In response to the perceived value, the receiver modifies his/her actions, and the provider also modifies their actions to improve the service. In this model, value is co-created by such modifications of providing and receiving action in use of the service. Here, reflectiveness is regarded as the ability to appropriately modify one’s own actions. The original meaning of “reflect” is to modify one’s own actions by comparing one’s own ideal model with the current state. However, the value of a service is co-created by mutual interactions between provider and receiver. Each should reflect on the other, and on contents and channels as well as on themselves. As shown in the lower section of Fig. 3, reflectiveness is defined here as an ability to appropriately modify one’s own actions in comparing the ideal provider, receiver, contents, and channels. To realize a value co-creative service, it is extremely important for both provider and receiver to have this ability. Idealizing each other is a required condition of the service; if there is a large gap between the provider’s ideal receiver and the current receiver, or between the receiver’s ideal provider and the current provider, it will be difficult to form a co-creative relationship between provider and receiver. For that reason, negotiation and consensus building around these gaps is necessary for realization of a viable co-creative relationship.

Fig. 3.
figure 3

A model for service value co-creation [5]

Full size image

3.2 Learning State Model

Figure 4 presents an overview of the proposed learning state model, which consists of two elements: learning states and instructional/learning events. These learning states are described from the viewpoint of the service value co-creation model, in terms of a teacher (provider), learner (receiver), and learning contents and channels. In addition, each viewpoint includes a current state (ASIS) as well as an ideal sate (TOBE). Instructional/learning events, on the other hand, are described in terms of learning and instructional theory. For example, instructional events include instructional behavior, such as recommendation of learning contents; learning events include learning behavior, such as review of learning contents. This model represents a process of consensus building.

Fig. 4.
figure 4

Overview of the learning state model

Full size image

3.3 Method for Analyzing the Consensus-Building Process

This method begins from an identification of states in which the teacher achieves consensus with the learner on the basis of lecture data. One example of such data might include a questionnaire and conversation between teacher and learner. The relevant states are identified as current state (ASIS) or ideal state (TOBE), as seen from the viewpoints of teacher, learner, and learning contents/channels.

Next, the states are arranged in chronological order, and instructional/learning events that realize transition between states are then described. Finally, the teacher determines a strategy for consensus building that will achieve the learning goals. To determine this strategy, the teacher analyzes the state transition of a learner who has achieved those learning goals, specifying the states that are required to obtain consensus, a sequence for obtaining consensus, and instructional/learning events for obtaining consensus.

4 Application

For determination of a strategy for consensus building, the proposed method was applied here to an English lecture for a graduate and an undergraduate student in the engineering department. In this case, we first extracted those states through which the teacher built consensus with the student. In this lecture, each student received counseling that enabled the teacher to build consensus with them. In this counseling, the teacher aimed to understand what kind of learning contents the student had worked on to date, and their reason for wanting to take this lecture. This counseling took about one hour and was conducted twice. Based on the data about conversation during counseling, we extracted the states through which the teacher built consensus with the student. Figure 5 shows examples of the extracted states-for example, we identified experience of practical English communication as a current state of the learner, as this student had experienced communication with international students. As an ideal learner state, on the other hand, we identified the opportunity to use English after graduation, as this student wished to go abroad on a company program.

Fig. 5.
figure 5

A process of consensus building in the English lecture

Full size image

Next, the states were arranged in chronological order, and instructional/learning events that realized transitions between states were described. Figure 5 shows examples of instructional/learning events described in this step. For example, the teacher conducted an instructional event on “hearing about opportunities for using English after graduation”, building consensus about an ideal state of the learner, who hoped to go abroad with the company. In addition, by conducting an instructional event on “suggesting target abilities of English”, they reached agreement about increasing speaking volume.

Finally, we determined a strategy for consensus building that achieved learning goals. This lecture aimed to help students to understand how learning English can be used as a communication tool, providing an opportunity to communicate with students at a university abroad. To determine the strategy, the teacher must analyze the state transition of a learner in achieving learning goals, specifying states that are required to obtain consensus, a sequence for obtaining consensus, and instructional/learning events for obtaining consensus. This application therefore adopted the OPIC (Oral Proficiency Interview-computer) test [6], which evaluates English communication ability. The test was conducted before the first counseling session and again after the second. Next, from among students who achieved a target learning goal, we selected students who achieved a level on the OPIC that had been agreed between teacher and student. By analyzing the state transitions of these students, we were able to specify a strategy for consensus building. In particular, we specified states required to obtain consensus, a sequence for obtaining consensus, and instructional/learning events for obtaining consensus. Figure 6 shows the strategy specified on the basis of these results, which first acknowledged future opportunities for the student to use English and then reached agreement about the level of English ability required to avail of this opportunity. On that basis, the teacher suggested a target OPIC level and the e-learning contents required to achieve that level.

Fig. 6.
figure 6

The strategy for consensus building

Full size image

5 Discussion

The reported study analyzed the data from counseling between teacher and learner, specifying the strategy for consensus building that achieved the target learning goal. We conducted a follow-up survey with the student who achieved the target learning goal, which revealed that the student had completed 11 of the 13 e-learning contents recommended by the teacher. As progress on these e-learning contents was not considered in grade evaluation of the lecture, it can be assumed that the student recognized the effectiveness of these contents in reaching the required level of ability and selected the learning behavior that achieved this. Since the student achieved the level agreed with the teacher, these contents can be considered effective.

Based on this result, it is expected that identifying an appropriate strategy not only enables the teacher to suggest effective contents but also supports students in selecting adequate learning behaviors. Future work will include application of the strategy in an actual lecture and validation of its effectiveness.

6 Conclusion

This study focuses on consensus building between the teacher and learners, developing a model to represent a process of consensus building. In the application, we determined a strategy to realize providing effective contents and conducting adequate learning behaviors. Future works include the application of the identified strategy to an actual lecture.