Monday, November 14, 2011

High School Student Communications

Hello everyone,

This is my final video project for Principles of Distance Education 7102-2. Please feel free to comment and critique. I look forward to viewing your projects as well. :)






Tim

Sunday, November 6, 2011

Technology & Media for Distance Education (DE) - Module 5 Graphic Organizer



Isn’t it exciting as we approach the transition era from Web 2.0 to 3.0?  What will come to be for the not so distant future of multimedia for instruction and learning in education?  The possibilities seem limitless.  Do I smell a paradigm shift from a static to a more dynamic interactivity between students, their peers, and their instructors?  It’s faint but I believe I do. ;)

But as for now, educators like us are still restricted in a sense to a predominant static nature in distance education (DE).  Really, we are basically still in an infancy stage of figuring out contextual computer application usage and what it is exactly we can use it for.  It can be for simple processes like messages to absent students concerning missed lessons, to very complex ways of enabling learners in simulations and games (McGreal & Elliott, 2008).  Some educational purposes demand a higher level of vigor from a medley of different media and then again, some don’t.  Furthermore, broadband providers are still trying to cover the nation which in turn means that there are still online institutional demands to play to the lowest common denominator when it comes to online learning.  That is, stick with low-end, text-based media tools as the principal ways of evaluating the attainment of online learning objectives.  To promote needed interactivity, the selection of media technology to support knowledge building needs to be a combination of what is available and what is feasible for the minimum technological requirements of the student computers (Moller, 2008).  As Internet speeds and memory continue to climb, there should be less concerns for this.  Maybe then we can begin a shift in prominence to more dynamic multimedia technologies for the support of educational settings.
Considering I am still a student in a totally online educational environment, I feel that I usually hang-out on the static side of the continuum.  I tend to think textually about my assignments and a bit of a fear will arise when I am to create or participate in other innovative forums.  This is my general learning gap that I am trying to overcome.  That is, to not be intimidated by existing and future multimedia technologies which are more dynamic by nature.  I can alleviate these apprehensions through research and communications with peers and instructors that ironically use many of these same static tools.  This course has taught me many things about my own interactivity with other participants and with strange software.  That there is many other media practices than the boring text-based methods.  It has introduced me to blogs, wikis, concept mapping, audio, video, and many other more dynamic multimedia program downloads that are available for K-12 education.  I can already feel the transition into more dynamic multimedia interactive methods.  I can support this transition by staying diligent in my aspirations of defeating my personal technology demons through facilitative discourse supplied in this Educational Technology program here at Walden University.  It is my aspiration to turn my green belt black in the practice of educational technology at the Walden dojo.
Tim      
References
McGreal, R. & Elliott, M. (2008). Technologies of online learning (E-learning). In T. Anderson (Ed.). The theory and practice of online learning. (2nd ed.). (pp. 1143-165). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.
Moller, L. (2008). Static and Dynamic Technologies. [Unpublished Paper]. Retrieved November 5, 2011, from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/courses/14936/CRS-WUEDUC8812-3730064/8842_M5_Paper.pdf

Saturday, October 29, 2011

Engaging K-12 Learners with New Strategies & Tools - Module 4




Current students in K-12 education received most of their technical knowledge at home rather than school.  These youngsters are a part of the Net Generation that can’t remember a time without the Internet and World Wide Web.  The majority of them grew up with a computer in the house and evolved with social media and mobile devices.  With this being said, it is difficult to understand administration and teacher fears of technology influenced pedagogy and the possibilities for the future.  Reservations about technology innovation in K-12 need to subside before any true implementation can be feasible.  The best way I can think of to alleviate some of these fears is to express to these professionals that a large majority of the students are using a lot of these tools on their own out of school.  These tools can be used for different purposes and are relatively simple to figure out.  That once you learn how to use them, you should not forget.  Many would say that it is like riding a bike, sort of. 

Here is a short description of the tools and strategies seen in the graphic organizer above.  Certain tools provide certain benefits to different learning context.  Remember, online teaching has three primary objectives which are to deliver cognitive, social, and teaching presence (Anderson, 2008).  Furthermore, it is believed that student interactivity is the key to effective instruction and contributes to learning success (Durrington, Berryhill, & Swafford).  Keep this in mind as you read through the tools below.  This will be an attempt to clarify some basics of what online tools work well for what and why. 

Content Tools – Databases, Search Engines, Cyber Library, Instructor/Facilitator, Resources

·         Databases are content oriented electronic filing systems that deliver peer and professional reviewed documents, journals, articles to specific key words.  This tool is best for educational research and should be the primary tool locating other research studies.

·         Search Engines, like Google & Bing, will deliver researchable, non-specific web-sites and are common knowledge to most all students.  These are normally best suited for secondary informational resources that are commonly used to support other research.

·         The majority of online learning environments have cyber libraries.  These virtual information filers are real people that aid students in finding what they need.

·         The online instructors themselves are providers of content information as well.  This can be requested in asynchronous environments as well as synchronous via other online tools.

·         Resources are the links to normally mandatory videos, web-sites, and documents to be analyzed for the lesson.   

Communication Tools – Email, Discussion Boards, Instant Messaging, Smartphone, Skype

·         Everyone knows Email, right?  Well, not quite but it is getting there.  This is the most common communication online tool that has evolved into the multimedia tool it is today.  Assignments could certainly be handed in this way from mobile device to teacher.

·         Predetermined discussion boards are awesome places for intermittent communications between all class participants.  They too work asynchronously in an ongoing conversation sort of way.  Students have critical thought conversations this way about specific ideas.

·         Instant Messaging (IM) begins the move towards  more synchronous conversations between students and their peers or teachers.  IM is almost synchronous but not quite which offers a quicker return on inquiry from another student or the facilitator.

·         The Smartphone devices that are common today have a wonderful ability to make learners mobile.  This tool is the “flux-capacitor” that transcends time and place.

·         Don’t forget about Skype.  This two-way video and two-way audio is face-to-face, second generation synchronous conversation.  Get good lighting for sure. :/



Collaboration Tools – Chat Rooms, Eluminate Live, Wiki, Blog

·         A chat room is a text-based online environment that facilitates group collaboration.  It too borderlines synchronous conversation and is recordable.  Archives of past conversations are available to students as well as teachers for future assessments.

·         Eluminate Live is a multimedia web-conferencing program that allows synchronous online conversation while also accommodating visuals with a white board.  This is a virtual conference room meant for collaboration or interactive discussions.

·         When it comes to asynchronous collaboration tools, nothing beats a wiki.  Here, students and instructors can talk and comment on each other’s critical thoughts.  He or she who makes the guest list is a collaborator and an editor of the wiki itself.

·         Weblogs are becoming popular as well.  Blogging is about as asynchronous as you can get.  Blogs are more individualized for the blogger is the only one who edits it, but is still functional as a collaboration tool.  Best for critical thought conversation between participants.  



With a good mix of these content, communication, and collaborative tools, engaging learners in online education usually happens.  I say a mix because a new blended learning teacher does not have to implement all of these, but rather a select few from each category that meets his/her own needs concerning pedagogy.  The ability to generate and collect data goes much faster than our own abilities to organize, manage, and utilize it (Learn Online, 2007).  With this being said, there is much room for trial and error in the K-12 learning environments to effectively use these tools with the specific purpose of engaging learners. 



References

Anderson, T. (2008). Teaching in an online learning context. In T. Anderson (Ed.). The theory and practice of online learning. (2nd ed.). (pp. 343-365). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Durrington, V. A., Berryhill, A., & Swafford, J. (2006). Strategies for enhancing student interactivity in an  online environment. College Teaching, 54(1), 190-193. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Learn Online. (2007, September 20). Re: 10 minute lecture – George Siemens – curatorial teaching [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://learnonline.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/10-minute-lecture-george-siemens-curatorial-teaching/


Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Assesing Collaborative Learning - Module 3 Part 2

Evaluating collaborative student learning can be difficult if not designed appropriately.  It is important that assessment align with learning objectives and collaboration activities to make students satisfied with the instruction and assessment easier for the facilitator (Palloff & Pratt, 2005).  If one of the objectives is to establish a solid sense of a learning community through group instructional strategy, first plan on informally meeting in a more relaxed cyber atmosphere like the Class CafĂ© Walden University utilizes.  This can somewhat simulate a breaking of the tension and also give the instructor a glimpse of who the students really are,  maybe even figuring out some personal and technical demographics of the student course population.  These clues should help determine authentic assessment fairness, equity, and validity of all students involved (Laureate, 2008).  It is thought that this can help instructors figure out more closely how each individual student has grown and compare them to the others.  Not everyone is going to learn the same things, but some will definitely learn more things and this can be recognized and used for assessment value.  It is important for the instructor/facilitator to stay informed of all developments of a community group so as to act decisively and quickly if necessary (Palloff & Pratt, 2007) and this could include modifying the assessment strategy even on the run if need be.  One thing is for sure; there are not many near perfect evaluation strategies to take a template from when instructors assess online individuals and groups of individuals.  My advice would be to try to understand the context of each individual collaboration member and the dynamics of the group altogether.

References

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2008). Assessment of collaborative learning. [Video webcast]. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5701360&Survey=1&47=9580570&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.  http://www.amazon.com/Building-Online-Learning-Communities-Strategies/dp/0787988251

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online: Learning together in community. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.  Retrieved from http://www.josseybass.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0787976148.html

Assessing Collaborative Efforts - Module 3, Part 1

In online learning and training environments, collaboration is often necessary to enhance the processes of instilling and retaining needed information in the human audience.  This is difficult to fathom for it is not in a predominantly synchronous, face-to-face (F2F) mode of communication.  Innovative forms of human interaction and the development of skills for resolving conflicts, setting goals, building trust, and collaboration are normally the backbone of typical team training or education programs (Hurst & Thomas, 2008).  Instructors play major roles in the developmental and assessment methods of these necessary skills by putting diligent effort into the process side of teaming and teaching (2008).  In turn, it is equally important for instructional to actively participate in group learning as it is the student target audience.

To assess these online collaborations, there is much to consider.  First, we as educational professionals must recognize that this is authentic assessment which utilizes non-conventional methods.  That is, instructors measure levels of participation while all participants aid him/her in the assessment process by critiquing their peer’s uploaded projects (Laureate, 2008).  What we as online educators are most interested in is more robust experiences in education that students can take with them after the course is complete.  The more students participate in collaborative activity and assessment, the much more likely a learning community will develop that will last well beyond the course (Palloff & Pratt, 2005).  Furthermore, it is recommended that clear guidelines and rubrics are provided to collaborative online students (2005) so everyone is on the same page and a true synthesis can be achieved.  We must understand that online learners have a wide range of varying skills and knowledge.  Assessment by an instructor/facilitator should measure student growth by asking where the students started in their knowledge versus where they ended up after the lesson (2008).  Only after all this can a true assessment be determined for a lesson or course.

What if a student is does not engage in the collaboration effort and is difficult to persuade into the learning community?  Well, there is not any concrete process to alleviate this issue, but here are some recommendations for instructors.  First, encourage other group members to coax the difficult student into the learning community to see if it can be handled from within.  Emphasis on politeness is probably the best approach which makes the instructor take on a mediator role.  Next, the instruction professional needs to assess his/her own diligence in the preparation of the collaboration lesson’s (2005) and hopefully the instructor has a Plan-B for how to intervene in this type of incident.  Maybe a more individualistic approach for the difficult student can achieve the same goals and objectives.  When developing the collaborative experience, it is a good idea to create a mix of individual and community based activities (Laureate, 2008).  Like a role play for instance that could give the difficult member an individualistic task to complete.  This could even change the assessment of the facilitator of the collaboration activity of a group.  But probably not significantly for if the difficult student just absolutely refuses to participate and after everything has been tried, well then the others must pick up the slack and accomplish the task at hand.  That is the way it is in the real world, so why not in this instance.              

References

Hurst, D., & Thomas, J. (2008). Developing team skills and accomplishing team concepts online. In T. Anderson (Ed.). The theory and practice of online learning. (2nd ed.). (pp. 441-472). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.  http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/second_edition.html
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online: Learning together in community. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.  http://www.josseybass.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd0787976148.html


Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2008). Assessment of collaborative learning. [Video webcast]. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5701360&Survey=1&47=9580570&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2008). Learning communities. [Video webcast]. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5701360&Survey=1&47=9580570&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1


Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Collaborative Interaction-Module 2

Indeed, interactions of the human race outside of third world countries have dramatically evolved over the last two decades.  Communications as a whole has changed significantly along with this evolution.  In America, the U.S. Postal Service, or snail mail as many would call it today, has became far less popular and given way to electronic mail (e-mail) for obvious reasons.  Cellular telephones have become very much mobile devices that, with a good provider, allow the customer to speak to folks from just about anywhere.  And computer communications have taken giant leaps forward with the introduction and wide acceptance of Web 2.0 tools such as text-based chat-rooms, discussion boards, instant messaging, blogs, and wiki’s to name a few.  Furthermore, better audio and compressed video qualities have opened up substantial opportunities for supporting computer based human interactions using both asynchronous and synchronous communications and has allowed for even better quality collaboration efforts in all sectors including business, military, and education.  YouTube and Skype are common place in presentations and collaborations between different numbers of participants.  Though some bugs need to be exterminated in these two forms of video-based technology, that is sure to happen and the future looks even brighter. 

All in all, computer-based multi-media communications technologies have evolved and improved so much that it is now easy to get multiple intellectual responses from experts around the world of just about any topic under the sun (Laureate, 2008).  With this in mind it is easy to see how human interactions and collaborative efforts have evolved from being restrained by time and place to anytime/anywhere efforts using computer-based communications and mobile technologies. 

Ray Schroader shares in his blog that principles of interaction and collaboration are at the core of innovative teaching and learning (Ray, 2008).  In an earlier post to Merlot (Multimedia Educational Recourse for Learning and Online Teaching) concerning collaboration he says, “Wouldn’t it be great to have access to some of the lectures, simulations, and other objects that our good colleagues developed elsewhere in the world” (2008)?  Since this was posted on his blog three years ago, this seems to have become a reality to many higher education students and teachers.  Higher education has seen advancements in collaboration efforts amongst teachers and students and my hope is that K-12 environments will pick up on this.  It is my contention that this is indeed necessary for these younger educational environments to get out of old-school industrialized learning practices that currently still have the American system of education regressing.

Jim Vanides relays that the real goal of collaborative learning, or learning together, is developing the skills needed for lifelong learning (the HP Blog Hub, 2010).  That is, to create career like opportunities and to participate in Communities of Practice (2010).  At the K-12 levels, interactive collaborations develop skills needed to be successful in undergraduate studies.  More of these similar efforts in undergraduate studies will develop necessary skills for graduate studies or even entry level positions of employment.  By then, collaborative learners should surely have the personal and interpersonal skills and the upper hand if you will to be competitive in their career fields.  I feel it is an evolutionary process that really never ends and only gets better with more practice.  If learners come in with the attitudes of learning something new every day about how to deal with different collaborators, be they friends or foes, it is my opinion that all options will be assessed and that the true value of the topic at hand will eventually surface.

Check out the links below to view more from these professional blogs.    


References

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2008). The future of distance education. [Video webcast]. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5701360&Survey=1&47=9580570&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

 Ray. (2008, June 18). Re: Online interaction and collaboration. [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://interactandcollaborate.blogspot.com/

 The HP Blog Hub. (2010, February 22). Re: Changing the education equation (part-2) – communities & collaboration. [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://h30507.www3.hp.com/t5/Teaching-Learning-amp-Technology/bg-p/148/label-name/collaboration

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Evolution of Distance Education (DE) - Module 1

The question still remains.  Is distance education (DE) where it needs to be for effective learning for today and for the future?  The answer to this question is a definite no for most all of the sectors in our society have yet to perfect the art of instructional and curricular design concerning computer influenced DE.  Because of this, an evolution is in order that will take us into the next generation of DE instructors and learners and possibly even into future generations after that.  Dr. Simonson relates that DE is certainly beginning to be adopted and widely accepted by the masses of our society (Laureate, 2008).  This may be true but it does not mean that what is being done now is in no need of continuous improvement.  Though some sectors have embraced DE more than others, they all have reasons for much skepticism.  Let's look into three specific sectors more in depth and try to pinpoint the main pitfalls in their attempts at DE via the computer.

DE has made the most significant impact in the corporate world of business.  Economics of training and development has made it viable for corporations to educate the masses of employees in a timely and on-demand access that was formerly impossible (Moller, Foshey, & Huett, 2008).  Conversely, evaluation methods are of low-priority to corporate managers which violates basic principles of instructional design (2008).  So in turn, who is to say what is effective or non-effective if formative and summative evaluations rarely happen in a one-size-fits-all training methodology?

In the higher education realm, competitiveness sometimes dominates quality in their efforts in DE.  Since DE can theoretically serve remote learners,  institutions in isolated service areas are now in competition with established institutions using DE and the quality of these programs may be put on the back burner (Moller, Foshay, & Huett, 2008).  The hope is that this will naturally develop more meaningful quality standards (2008) which has not quite truly happened as of yet.

For K-12 environments, there has only been very modest growth in DE (Huett, Moller, Foshay, & Coleman, 2008).  While the national government requires all states to offer alternatives to student bodies who do not make annual yearly progress (AYP), K-12 professionals are skeptical of using technology because of its shaky past (2008).  In turn, this has created considerable apprehensions that some would say are insurmountable.

What we have learned is that there are definite problems to overcome in all sectors of education and training in our society concerning the use of DE.  I concur with the research of this blog in that a DE evolution period is indeed inevitable in an attempt to overcome the many obstacles that occur today.  The reason for this is that these problems are far more in-depth than a simple solution can recognize.  Furthermore, I feel a true diffusion of DE technology into the public K-12 sector that I participate in is ultimately most complicated more than any other sector because of differences of learners, the apprehension of professionals, and the lack of concrete DE standards.

References

Huett, J., Moller, L., Foshay, W. R. & Coleman, C. (2008). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the Web. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 52(5), 63-67. doi:10.1007/s11528-008-0199-9

Moller, L., Foshay, W. R., & Huett, J. (2008). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the Web. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 52(4), 66-70. doi:10.1007/s11528-008-0179-0

Moller, L., Foshay, W. R., & Huett, J. (2008). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the Web. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 52(3), 70-75. doi:10.1007/s11528-008-0158-5

All three articles @ http://web.ebscohost.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/ehost/resultsadvanced?sid=8528942b-d641-4973-b475-abf018e9eced%40sessionmgr113&vid=2&hid=123&bquery=(The+evolution+of+distance+education)&bdata=JmRiPWE5aCZjbGkwPUZUJmNsdjA9WSZ0eXBlPTEmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZlJnNjb3BlPXNpdGU%3d
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2008). Distance education: The next generation [Video webcast]. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5701360&Survey=1&47=9580570&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1