Flight Path Synthesis and Reflection
Word Count: ~ 1100 (Note – the word count does not include the original flight path commentary, highlighted and italicized)
I designed my flight path as a series of questions that I wanted to be able to answer where relevant throughout and at the end of this course. In this synthesis I will review these questions, reflect on how these questions guided my thinking, or how the questions changed, and discuss what I have learned and next steps going forward.
“How can I be a more engaged member of a community?”
A more personal goal for this course is to more actively engage as a member of the course community. The ISTE standards recognize the importance of educators also being a “learner”. This includes active participation in global and local networks (ISTE, 2017). In other courses I have struggled with engagement in discussion forums because the value was not always apparent to me. Now that I am in the end stages of the M.E.T program, I think I would be remiss to not be as engaged as possible. I hope to leverage the expertise and experience of my educator peers in this course to help be more engaged and to understand where my first goal (to be a supporter) fits in today’s context.
Throughout my experience in the MET program, I have had a strange relationship with discussion boards. I understand their value in an asynchronous online course for fostering student discussion and engagement, but at this stage, I have yet to find myself actively engaging at an appropriate level (or, at least, I am not a top contributor to discussions). I was looking forward to engaging in smaller group discussions, but I am not sure that these smaller discussions were set up in groups, as they seemed to include the entire class.
I appreciated that this course started with both a video assignment, and a group assignment, as it was a chance to meet classmates in an environment I find much more engaging and comfortable than discussion boards. The video assignment, while initially uncomfortable was a good ice breaker for moving beyond simply text-based dialogue. In the group project, I was glad to get to know some classmates at a more personal level, as we used Discord for our communication, as well as some planning video calls.
Moving forward, I would like to explore how my personal experience of discussion boards fares with others through some focused literature reviews. I would also like to continue to learn about different options for engagement and communication amongst students in an online asynchronous environment.
“How can I go beyond the educator and the learner?”
While the learner is at the centre of education, and is deeply connected to the educator, it is important to also consider the other parties and challenges that exist in the larger educational system. Chickering & Ehrmann (1996) write that “technology is not enough” and identify institutional policy, and legislators as important components for technologies to be used effectively and efficiently. The implementation of their Seven Principles must go beyond the educator and student: “it is appropriate for legislators and other benefactors to ask whether institutions are striving to improve educational practice consistent with the Seven Principles” (Chickering & Erhmann, 1996, para. 35-36).
Chickering and Erhmann (1996) identify parties beyond the learner and educator, like legislators, policy-makers, community members that are important to consider when improving educational practices. In the first assignment of this course, we designed a rubric that would help an institution determine whether or not to switch learning management systems. The various frameworks we explored to develop our rubric, which focused on the MIT framework (Osterweil et al., 2015), and the article A rubric for evaluating E-Learning Tools in Higher Education (Anstey & Watson, 2018) were useful in identifying factors and broader audiences to consider when adopting new technologies. Beyond the educator and learner perspectives, there are privacy and policy implications that need to include IT and administrators, there are access and diversity implications that need to include experts and members of the community, there are adoption factors that should include technology experts, instructional designers, and other support professionals. I have learned that the first step in going beyond the educator and the learner is to think past a “classroom”, and recognize that there are many important figures that need to be considered/consulted when it comes to educational technology adoption.
“What do I need to know about ‘digital’ vs. ‘mobile’ technologies?”
Looking ahead in the course, there is a module regarding mobile technologies which states that mobile technologies are not delivery platforms. I hope to investigate where the difference is today. My laptop is mobile, my cell phone has the Canvas app – what are the key distinctions that are important when discussing the differences or similarities in these technologies? Do educators see a distinction where students may no longer? Is there a more important semantic difference that I am unaware of or have I created a distinction that I need to break down?
In my initial formulation of this question I was focused on my personal experience of “mobility” when it came to technology – the technology I have access to is fairly mobile, and I have the luxury of choosing multiple devices to engage with / work on. Grant et al. (2015) examined how mobile computing devices were used in k-12 classrooms, and noted that while some teachers allowed the use of mobile devices that were truly mobile (remained with the student throughout the day), some used devices as a substitute to a stationary computer. Upon reflection, I think my initial inquiry to find the difference between digital and mobile was too narrow. The class discussion “If I build a house, will they come?” allowed me to expand this narrow viewpoint and consider communities of people who do not have the same access to infrastructure and technology that blur the distinction between mobile and digital that I initially had in my mind.
“What connections can I make to my previous ETEC courses?”
I am pleased to be taking this course later in my M.E.T journey, because the previous courses have provided a better infrastructure for the technology we will learn about to be a part of. I see one of my goals of this course as making the connection between the technology and what has been learned so far. I will challenge myself to reference what I have learned in previous courses as well as specific articles or readings from those courses as relevant to the current module in ETEC 524.
Throughout this course, I have identified many connections to previous courses. I have been reviewing assigned readings as well as literature I have found throughout my MET journey, and hope to find a way to categorize these readings based on some of these connections. I am in the final stretch of the MET program, and asking this question in this course has led me to realize that I would like to complete the Graduating Project (ETEC 590) in order to make connections between the courses I have taken, and to formally synthesize what I have learned.
One of the largest takeaways from this course that I will engage with in any future courses, and in my professional experience was building the companion website and course layout as parts of designing an introductory module and course structure, and developing a unit of learning. I found the ability to embed content in Moodle allowed me flexibility while considering student privacy issues (that using an LMS can help with). I am also glad to have been able to compare an out-of-the-box website tool (ubc blogs) with a more fully customized website, and can appreciate some of the pros and cons of each.
“How can ETEC524 help me become a supporter of a digital-age teaching professional?”
I have no formal educator experience, and no current desire to become an educator per se. I am, however, a supporter of educators. As such, I think the value in this course for me is to understand more deeply the challenges and also the perspective of educators who adopt technology. I will have to find resources that might help me understand the pedagogical perspective where I may already have technology understanding. The ISTE educator standard 1c is to stay current with research including findings from learning sciences. In areas of the course where I feel I have the right understanding of technology, I hope to pursue relevant research that connects the technology to pedagogy that might help me understand perspectives outside of my own.
My reflection so far has helped me shape some key learnings in this course, which will all help me be a better supporter of digital-age teaching professionals. In summary:
- I have a deeper appreciation of the student perspective of online asynchronous learning. My experience with discussion boards, and desire for deeper engagement with my peers has inspired me to explore more technologies that might support peer to peer communication.
- My experience (as a relatively well-off student in an affluent part of Canada) is not the norm, and even in different parts of Canada there are still systematic and contextual issues that must be addressed for the appropriate adoption of educational technologies.
- Digital-age teaching professionals require access to support from administration, their communities, and professional development for them to adopt technology in a sustainable way.
References
Anstey, L., Watson, G. (2018). A rubric for evaluating E-Learning Tools in Higher Education. Educause. Retrieved June 3, 2021, from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2018/9/a-rubric-for-evaluating-e-learning-tools-in-higher-education
Chickering, A. W., & Ehrmann, S., C. (1996). Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 49(2), 3-6. Retrieved May 16, 2021, from http://www.aahea.org/articles/sevenprinciples.htm
Grant, M. M., Tamim, S., Brown, D. B., Sweeney, J. P., Ferguson, F. K., & Jones, L. B. (2015). Teaching and Learning with Mobile Computing Devices: Case Study in K-12 Classrooms. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 59(4), 32–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-015-0869-3
Osterweil, S., Shah, P., Allen, S., Groff, J., & Sai Kodidala, P., & Schoenfeld, I. (2015). Summary report: A framework for evaluating appropriateness of educational technology use in global development programs. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts & The Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, India. Retrieved from https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/115340/Summary%20Report_A%20Framework%20for%20Evaluating%20Appropriateness%20of%20Educational%20Technology%20Use%20in%20Global%20Development%20Programs.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y