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. (2^nd 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