Reflections on My ETEC 565 Experience
General Reflections on my Flight Path
My overall goal for this course was to develop my knowledge and skills to help in the planning and implementing of technology-supported learning in our school and in the Board. I was concerned mainly with the potential of technology to engage our students and give them access to a greater variety of teaching and learning resources. My focus when I began this course was to use technology to archive and preserve the Dene language and culture, but my perspective has widened to include enriching all our curriculum offerings. I was also concerned to find a solution to our low bandwidth issues that have made the use of online resources in our classrooms very problematic.
My main interests when I began this course were to become more aware of how technology can support and enrich learning for our students; how to use technology to foster collaboration and interaction between staff members to support our Professional Learning Community in the school and connect with staff in other schools; and acquire solid skills in course design, html, Dreamweaver and Photoshop. I understood that I needed to learn how to design learning environments that supported meaningful learning with collaboration, authentic tasks, and on-going assessment for learning. I knew that technology needed to be in the service of good pedagogy (Chickering & Ehrmann, 1996), but I did not have the authentic skills and experiences behind my beliefs. Finally, I recognized that without skills in the technologies I wanted to implement, without a clear understanding of the specific affordances of each learning technology, my efforts would continue to be frustrated. As an administrator, my skills in educational technology are central to my abilities to facilitate professional development, support staff technology use, and guide ‘best practices’ in integrating technology into our programs.
I came into this course with great anticipation and trepidation because of my very basic technology skills. I appreciated the very practical approach of this course as an excellent overall model of incorporating authentic learning experiences in a collaborative environment. The logic of beginning with an overall evaluation of LMS using the SECTIONS model (Bates & Poole, 2003) to the final, detailed focus on actually designing a course in Moodle has deepened my understanding by requiring me to work through each element. Developing the criteria for evaluation was largely theoretical for me at the start of the course. By the time I had considered each element as I designed my Moodle course, the realities of deciding what media to use for what learning activity, considering which formats would most easily support the interactions I needed, and getting into the details of interface design and navigation – the real practical value of the framework emerged.
Toolkit Explorations
I found a few of the topics in the toolkit useful – mainly the html and the video editing/DVD sections. Many of the other tools I was familiar with. The html links sent me off exploring for many hours online. I looked at quite a few ‘Web Pages That Suck’, and some were pretty bad! I found that for the specific issues I faced in Moodle, in particular designing my Splash page, I watched many video tutorials on YouTube, went to the Moodle blog sites, and went through quite a few online html tutorials. This way I could research my specific questions relating to page layout, images, creating link buttons etc. I also did some research around video editing and creating DVDs. Although I have previously done both, I was interested in some new DVD programs that might be useful for layout and content using templates. I found several programs that were recommended, but doing three MET courses this term gave me little extra time to really explore some of these tools.
I also spent some time going over the TOS for several of the social media sites. This was useful in the context of deciding whether these would be suitable for student use, especially for younger students. Although in a few cases it is possible to set up a private workspace, the fact that students could be exposed to third party content of possibly questionable taste, it is difficult to justify using these platforms for student practice. Most of the sites take no responsibility for content, and although they do make an effort to delete any offensive content this does not protect younger students from being exposed to some of the more negative and unwholesome aspects of the Web.
The software I was really interested in learning was Dreamweaver and Photoshop. I have used Photoshop before but my skills are very basic. I signed up for a trial of DW, which was great, but again I found the demands of my courses did not leave me enough time to really play around and experiment. I plan to purchase both programs and develop my expertise in them because I feel they are directly related to my interest in designing online courses and web sites with more artistic and design value.
My ETEC 565 Experience
The reason I took this course is that I heard it would be very hands-on and I was hoping to come away with the ability to design online courses and develop some skills in programs like Dreamweaver and Photoshop. Although I came into the course with good basic technology skills, I found that I ended up learning a great deal about technologies I knew nothing about – from LMS to quizzes, social media, collaboration and assessment tools, and the story telling tools, etc. In the end I did not have much time to learn Dreamweaver – but I learned so many other skills, especially through designing my Moodle course, that I am quite confident that I will be able to learn it by playing around with it.
I was very anxious at the start of the course when we had to take the html quiz and worried that I was in the wrong course! The intense pressure of having to design this Moodle course with basically no structured support was quite overwhelming for me, especially when it became obvious that I was going to have to learn html to design some kind of reasonable Splash page since I did not have Dreamweaver to play with. I experimented with a number of different programs to see if I could avoid html!! But after playing in Moodle and spending many hours coding my splash page myself, I have a good understanding of basic html tags etc., which is totally surprising to me – and satisfying! I learned a lot going through the design and creation process for the Moodle course, I would do many things differently next time around – but I have some basic skills now and have confidence that if needed, I know where to access the resources and support to solve most html and design problems. As well, it was a great experience for me to be learning with many colleagues who clearly had many years experience in the field and considerable expertise, yet were willing to take the time to support a few of us neophytes. At a few points where frustration and general panic were setting in, these were the people that helped me keep my focus and confidence.
My experience with all the technologies used in this course has increased my comfort level and understanding of how chat rooms, Google docs, wikis, discussion forums, Wimba, Adobe connect and other tools can support learning and collaboration (Anderson, 2008). Support and feedback from colleagues in this course has helped develop confidence and knowledge about this new community of practice I am entering. I feel my first hand experience ‘as a student’ with the benefits (and issues) of the technologies we explored in the course is the best possible learning I can take away. I am doing three MET courses together this term, and I found the information, theories, and learning in each course fed into the others and allowed me to make so many new connections. In many ways it was much richer than only doing one course.
The downside of doing three courses was that I found that some things I really wanted to explore more, responding thoughtfully to more posts in each discussion, and connecting more deeply with the learning community in each course was not as easy for me due to time constraints. This too was a good lesson. For some students this would not have been a rich experience, it would have been chaos. And it nearly was a few times for me! To really benefit from this model of instruction it is important that students are not overwhelmed with too may posts, too many activities and too many people in their learning groups. This is important in terms of designing individual courses, but also in ensuring our students have the “space” to focus on, and benefit from, the online courses they do take.
One of the places I really appreciated the expertise of a few of my colleagues was in looking at and analyzing some of the case studies. The true value of collaborative learning, discussion, working through disagreements and dissonance became very clear to me and was of great benefit. Every time I do an MET course I learn more about the basic generosity of online learning spaces, and that colleagues in these course are genuinely self-motivated, intentional learners. I have grown in my ability to share ideas, be confident in contributing analysis and frameworks for group activities, and in understanding the value of constructive critique in the development of everyone’s ideas and skills.
Finally, on the theoretical level I found this course really provided me solid foundations for analyzing the capabilities and affordances of specific educational technologies, and in evaluating how these technologies can best support good pedagogical practices. Anderson’s articles provided a very comprehensive “vision” of the best practices of online learning and an excellent analysis of the components and interrelationships of the cognitive, social and teaching presences in the learning environment. From my background, where we have been working very seriously to implement constructivist best practices in our instruction and assessment strategies, I found the analysis from Bates & Poole (2003), Chickering & Ehrmann (1996), and the ISTE standards provided a conceptual framework for connecting our best practices to appropriate technologies. To give one example, much of our assessment is based on group process and projects, and I now see how many of the tools we have used in this course could be adapted in our situation to expand and facilitate collaboration, and provide resources and media support for project-based activities. Many of our discussions have brought out the importance of step by step planning, teacher PD and peer mentoring to develop ownership, skills and comfort, and ensure teachers know how to use technology in support of pedagogical practice – not just for its own sake, as a distraction or entertainment. As well, our discussions and the readings reminded me, as an administrator, of the importance of a teach-model-practice approach to professional development, with online collaborative spaces for teachers to share strategies, develop lessons and engage in critical feedback.
These frameworks will also be useful as we begin a planning process to integrate technology more seamlessly into the classroom, and explore our first locally hosted Moodle course in the school. Gibbs and Simpson (2005) will be an excellent reference for reflecting on our current practice, and looking at the value of computer-based assessments as supports, and using more technology-supported discussion and project-based learning in our assessment strategies. My prior training and experience left me with a largely unexamined prejudice against computer-assisted assessment as a relic of the old behaviourist, transmissive approaches to teaching. Designing the Pretest quiz really made me re-evaluate my position, and I see now, for certain kinds of content, and to assist in providing timely feedback in an online learning environment, computer-based assessment can be quite useful. I ended up using this model to design the end of course self/peer assessment survey – a very convenient way to assess and get student feedback online.
Many of online tools we explored, like the storytelling tools, wikis and blogs were new experiences for me and I will be sharing these with staff and with our students. The discussion about safety and privacy were a good background to have for these technologies, but I know if we ensure student privacy these will be very supportive and engaging technologies to support literacy, storytelling structure and sharing learning of all different kinds in any subject field.
Many of the other readings provided additional frameworks and suggestions for integrating technology in the design of learning environments (Anderson, 2008; Chickering & Ehrmann, 1996; Johnson & Aragon, 2002; Siemens, 2003) which I found helpful as I worked though my Moodle course, but also will prove invaluable in the future as we plan at the school level. Many of our students have difficulty engaging with a lot of text, and I now see the central affordance of multimedia to provide content in multiple formats gives students more choice in how they engage with content and tasks. The promise of increasing engagement and developing educationally focused technology skills from incorporating social media for collaboration, and game-based learning formats is huge for us. Given my experiences in this course, I would also like to explore the potential for students to develop their own learning games which would involve fairly high level thinking. Finally, I see technology-based collaboration as a better way to engage students in group tasks and tap into their incredible attention span when it comes to technology activities!
Multimedia representation of knowledge can be very enriching for students, motivating and engaging; videos, and digital learning objects in science and math can support complex concepts and critical thinking; simulations and virtual experiments are especially useful in remote or poorly equipped schools to enable access to resources and activities that would otherwise not be available due to large costs, or lack of expertise. It is critical to use clear judgment though in using these tools to ensure they serve a pedagogical purpose and do not create a media or information overload (Johnson & Aragon, 2002; Siemens, 2003), or create unnecessary download issues (Janson & Janson, 2009). I anticipate that being able to base some resources on our local server will help us to overcome some of our bandwidth issues until such time when political policies catch up with the new realities in education.
I think the most powerful ‘theoretical impact’ that I have taken from this course resulted from watching all the Michael Wesch videos I could find, reading blogs and generally exploring what he is doing. A statement that he made in a blog really hit me: “There is literally something in the air, and it is nothing less than the digital artifacts of over one billion people and computers networked together collectively producing over 2,000 GB of new information per second. …Classrooms… are now enveloped by a cloud of ubiquitous digital information where knowledge is made, not found, and authority is continuously negotiated through discussion and participation. In short, they tell us that our walls no longer mark the boundaries of our classrooms.” (Michael Wesch, Encyclopedia Britannica blog, Oct. 21, 2008)
Exploring many of the creative mash-ups, TED videos, and commentaries by the likes of Clay Shirky, J. Letham, and John P. Barlowe, I found my entire conception of the Web and education changing. I took some time out to work on MET courses this year because my frustrations with the ‘education system’ have been building over the past four or five years. What we are doing up north, and I gather from my colleagues down here it is not much different, is not working very well for our First Nations students. All our students have amazing focus and energy for many of their online activities, but in class… I feel I am starting to understand this whole change more clearly now, and ‘intelligent’ technology integration seems to be one of the key elements. The whole Web 2.0 phenomena with its user-generated content, organization, and creativity – the remix, mash ups – shows a real confidence, and a “celebration of new forms of empowerment”. We need to re-visit the basic structures of education, and find a way to translate this tremendous creative energy into learning – connecting it inside and outside the school (Mabrito & Medley, 2008). I feel one way to open the door a crack to these new possibilities of learning for my students is to begin with this Moodle course, explore the use of social media tools and maybe try BYOD. Will this help to solve all our issues? No, but I think some experimental exploration is in order.
I am grateful for the hands on aspect of this course – authentic tasks, the excellent collaboration and feedback from peers, and the periodic videos (smile), comments, and the incredibly helpful summations of each activity and discussion that provided teaching presence. I feel I will take this approach to practice back to my workplace where I see the potential for collaboration tools to enhance our programs, course development, PD etc. My understanding of the critical importance of interaction, discussion and collaboration in learning has really grown through my experiences in this course, and the other MET courses I am taking. Successes like Fisch’s ‘Blogging in their own Words’ are very inspiring, showing the potential of these new technologies to engage students in learning inside and outside the classroom. We will definitely try some experiments with collaborative technologies like wikis, blogs, and perhaps some discussion forums with classes from other schools.
I feel much more prepared to bring our school into the 21st century. I have more knowledge, more confidence, clearer understanding of the issues and theoretical foundations which will help me support my staff and students. I do hope that some of the technologies we will be trying at our school will stimulate interest in our Board as a whole, and in the GNWT, to seriously explore the potential that these learning technologies have to support all our students in remote communities throughout the north.
References
A Vision for 21st Century Education: Premier’s Technology Council, December 2010. Vancouver, British Columbia. Retrieved from: http://www.gov.bc.ca/prem/popt/technology_council/
Anderson, T. (2008a). Teaching in an Online Learning Context. In: Anderson, T. & Elloumi, F. (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning. (pp. 343-365). Athabasca University. Retrieved from: http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/14_Anderson_2008_Anderson-DeliveryQualitySupport.pdf
Anderson, T. (2008b). Towards a Theory of Online Learning. In: Anderson, T. & Elloumi, F. (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning. (pp.45-74). Athabasca University. Retrieved from: http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/02_Anderson_2008_Anderson-Online_Learning.pdf
Bates, A.W. & Poole, G. (2003). Chapter 4: A Framework for Selecting and Using Technology. In Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education: Foundations for Success. (pp. 77-105). San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers. Retrieved January 6, 2012 from: https://www.vista.ubc.ca/webct/urw/tp0.lc5116011/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct
Chickering, A.W. and Ehrmann, S.C. (1996). “Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as Lever,” American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 49(2), 3-6. Retrieved January 6, 2012 from: http://www.aahea.org/bulletins/articles/sevenprinciples.htm
Chickering, A.W. and Gamson, Z.F. (1987). Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7. Retrieved January 6, 2012 from: http://www.aahea.org/bulletins/articles/sevenprinciples1987.htm
Gibbs, G., Simpson, C. (2005). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education (1), 3-31. Retrieved from: http://www.open.ac.uk/fast/pdfs/Gibbs%20and%20Simpson%202004-05.pdf
Johnson, S., Aragon, S. (2002). An Instructional Framework for Online Learning Environments. In: T.M. Egan & A.A. Lynham. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Academy for Human Resource Development, pp.1022-1029. Bowling Green, OH: AHRD.
Janson, A., Janson, R. (2009). Integrating Digital Learning Objects in the Classroom: A Need for Educational Leadership. Innovate, 5(3). Retrieved from: http://www.innovateonline.info/pdf/vol5_issue3/Integrating_Digital_Learning_Objects_in_the_Classroom-__A_Need_for_Educational_Leadership.pdf
Mabrito, M., Medley, R. (2008) Why Professor Johnny Can’t Read: Understanding the Net Generation’s Texts. Innovate. 4(6). Retrieved from: hhttp://www.innovateonline.info/pdf/vol4_issue6/Why_Professor_Johnny_Can’t_Read-__Understanding_the_Net_Generation’s_Texts.pdf
Rotherham, A., Willingham, D. (2009). 21st Century Skills: The Challenges Ahead. Educational Leadership Teaching for the 21st Century, 67(1), 16-21.
Siemens, G. (2003). Evaluating Media Characteristics: Using Multimedia to achieve learning outcomes. Elearnspace. http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/mediacharacteristics.htm
Wesch, M. (2007) A Vision of Students Today (& What Teachers Must Do). http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2008/10/a-vision-of-students-today-what-teachers-must-do/
Looking back, Looking forward – Reflections on the ETEC 565 Experience
1. Looking back, how does what you expected to learn during ETEC 565 compare to what you actually have learned, in terms of technical competencies?
I knew that this course would be very hands-on and I was hoping to come away with the ability to design online courses and develop some skills in programs like Dreamweaver and Photoshop. Being a relative newcomer to technology, I find that I have ended up learning a great deal about technologies I was not even aware of – from LMS to quizzes and social media interaction tools, and the story telling tools, etc. I did not have much time to learn more Dreamweaver – but I learned so many other skills, especially through Moodle, that I feel I will be able to learn it quite well if I sit down and play with it.
I was very anxious at the start of the course when we had to take the html quiz and thought maybe I was in the wrong course! But I feel after playing in Moodle and doing my splash page I have a good understanding of basic html tags etc which is totally surprising to me – and satisfying! I learned a lot going through the design and creation process for the Moodle course, I would do many things differently next time around – but I have some basic skills now.
2. Moving forward, how do you think what you learned in ETEC 565 will impact your educational practice, be it as an instructional designer, instructor or administrator?
I am grateful for the hands on aspect of this course – authentic tasks etc. and the excellent collaboration and feedback from peers. I feel I will take this approach to practice back to my workplace where I see the potential for collaboration tools to enhance our programs, course development, PD etc.
Many of the frameworks we used – from Bates & Poole, Chickering & Gamson, Anderson, and the ISTE standards will all be very useful in our work as we begin a planning process to integrate technology more seamlessly into the classroom, and explore our first locally hosted Moodle course in the school. I also found the Gibbs and Simpson article an excellent reference for reflecting on our current practice and we will be looking at some changes there, in addition to looking at the value of computer-based assessments as supports, and using more discussion, project-based learning with technology support in our assessment strategies. As well I know I will be sharing many of the tools with our students. I know the storytelling tools, wikis etc will be something very engaging and supportive to learning.
I would like to continue designing courses and developing my skills in baby steps until I feel more confident in my skills as a designer. Eventually I would like to develop online versions of many of our northern courses.