Looking back to where I started and where I have ended up I feel as though this course played an integral role in helping me clarify my MET-oriented career expectations; in particular the hands-on experience which I feel was invaluable. In applying for and being accepted into the MET program, I thought that I had a solid understanding of what I could expect as a student. In my experience, the idea of educational technology involved implementing different types of technologies to help the atypical learner who either had a physical, mental or learning-oriented disability. I quickly discovered that my vision for the MET program was quite different, as the focus is really on how to successfully integrate technology into an existing educational system. In retrospect, I realize that it was my personal experience of working with special needs students all my life that had led me to my initial expectations for the MET program. As I had just completed my undergraduate degree I found myself struggling during my first few classes, as I attempted to figure out where someone like me fit into a program where the majority of the students already have an array of knowledge and life experience through teaching. It wasn’t that I felt as though I was missing something, but it was the realization that the program wasn’t really designed for someone who didn’t have any experience as a teacher, or school administrator, etc. I ended up adopting the “do it yourself” user-centered philosophy that the online culture adopts to personalize and adapt technology on an individual level as a reflection of my outlook towards the MET program (Lamb, 2007), using the assignments to further my knowledge on atypical learners.
In retrospect, at the beginning of ETEC 565 I was still adrift so to speak, finding the readings to be very insightful; like the NETS for teachers 2008 that explained what a digital age teacher should encompass, and Chickering and Gamson’s (1987) seven principle framework laying out the fundamental teaching environment, but realizing that I still didn’t really know what I would like to accomplish upon completion of the course.
It wasn’t until I started preparing the proposal assignment and researching a topic for my Moodle site that the purpose of the course really started to take shape for me. I decided that I would use all of the assignments in ETEC 565 to examine students with learning disabilities, as it is a topic that is very close to me as I have been helping students with different disabilities become successful in their educational endeavours for the past few years. The course readings, assignments and e-learning toolkits took on a different light once I had a topic in the back of my mind.
It really clicked for me when I was combining the information on social software from the Elearning Toolkit, Gibbs and Simpson’s (2004) reading on Assessment and Downes’ (2004) reading on blogging. When I was tutoring students with learning disabilities at the undergraduate level, it always amazed me that I would have the same conversations with each of the students on social software and how they would never use any type of social software, in fear that they would get something incorrect and be embarrassed. Gibbs and Simpson’s (2004) reading on assessment that addressed the need for students to realize that there is a right and wrong to every answer, and that their job is to learn the correct answer and regurgitate it back to the teacher actually helped clarify why these students prefer not to use social software. Students with learning disabilities who have been brought up with this type of learning end up being afraid of social software and any constructivist environment. The concept of stating your opinion whether it is right or wrong is difficult for them to adopt, as they have historically only been regarded as making mistakes due to their learning disability.
It would be very beneficial for students who have already completed high school and have continued on to university to be encouraged and supported to push themselves out of their comfort zone, to get them to use different types of social software and social media, as it is not only the primary method of communication but it is also providing a new forum for learning.
I am still really excited to see what the future holds for the new generation of students who are growing up with learning disabilities. With a variety of new technologies for teachers to use in the classroom and the constructivist teaching methods being introduced, the gap between how the typical student and atypical student learn could be narrowed as stated by Downes (2004):
“…the world of fifth grade may seem remote to educators in the college and university system, these students, when they enter postsecondary education, may have had more experience writing online for an audience than writing with a pen and paper for a teacher. Such students will bring with them a new set of skills and attitudes.” (p.14)
I sincerely believe that this will be the case for all students, where writing for an audience, stating your opinion and getting feedback from them will be seen as a constructivist way to learn where students are working together to find the most correct answer. With mash-ups of media, blogs and wiki’s, students opinions and assignments won’t necessarily be shared through writing, as they will be able to use a wide range of media to get their point across. Blogs and wiki’s in particular are such a great way to complete assignments as students can add images, videos, links and connect concepts together which helps them easily clarify their message.
To help them achieve their educational goals, I wanted to create an environment for students with learning disabilities, which is why I designed a Moodle site that taught study skills and learning strategies for those students entering their first year of university. I initially had my doubts about how the site was going to work, as I discovered from the ELEarning Toolkit and my personal experience that a learning management system (LMS) like Moodle are largely based on reading and writing, which are skills that are relatively difficult for students with learning disabilities. Through additional research into the Elearning Toolkit I discovered that the LMS actually offered a wide range of options beyond reading, and even resolved the reading issue by providing you with the ability to integrate third party software like Nanogong that can read the site text out loud. In addition, I discovered that developing a Moodle site that examined different learning strategies was a great blended learning opportunity, as it introduced students to an LMS and encouraged them to move beyond their comfort zone in a safe and learning-friendly environment. It is for this reason that I opted to adopt the “sometimes less is more” approach (Panettieri, 2007). I felt it was important to keep my Moodle site as minimalistic as possible, deciding to avoid using unnecessary graphical elements and designed the site using CSS elements instead.
I had never really designed a complete html site before, but I did have some experience from a course that I took during my undergraduate degree. With my knowledge from the course, the Elearning Tooklit and the help of YouTube and Google I concluded that downloading a trial version of Dreamweaver was probably my best option. I really liked how the software offered a multi-view option so that I could see the html code on one side and the visual equivalent on the other. The graphical editor was quite extensive, but it was also interesting to be able to see what was going on “behind the scenes”. It wasn’t nearly as difficult as I thought it would be and integrating the html elements into the Moodle site was relatively seemless, although it would have been nice to have been working with Moodle 2.0 as the majority of the online documentation, forums and videos on YouTube discussed features that didn’t exist in the version we were using.
I didn’t realize until I finished the final project how much I had enjoyed creating the Moodle site, and working with software like VoiceThread and Wimba. I am really looking forward to exploring these and other software further and know that I will always be learning, I will get a lot of enjoyment from developing and designing programs to help others learn. I am also going to be sure to share Adam Levine’s (2010) “50+ ways to tell a story” with other students and eventually my colleagues. It is a fantastic resource that I know I will keep using well into the future.
References
Chickering, A.W. & Gamson, Z.F. (1987). Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. AAHE Bulletin. Retrieved from http://www.aahea.org/bulletins/articles/sevenprinciples1987.htm
Downes, S. (2004). Educational blogging. EDUCAUSE Review, p. 14-26.
Gibbs, G. & Simpson, C. (2005). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1, p. 3-31. Retrieved from http://www.open.ac.uk/fast/pdfs/Gibbs%20and%20Simpson%202004-05.pdf
International Society for Technology in Education (2008). NETS for teachers 2008. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/nets-for-teachers/nets-for-teachers-2008.aspx
Lamb, B. (2007). Dr. mashup or, why educators should learn to stop worrying and love the remix. EDUCAUSE Review, 42(4), p. 12-15. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSEReviewMagazineVolume42/DrMashuporWhyEducatorsShouldLe/161747
Levine, A. (2011). 50 web 2.0 ways to tell a story. Retrieved from http://cogdogroo.wikispaces.com/
Panettieri, J. (2007). Addition by subtraction. University Business. Retrieved from http://www.universitybusiness.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=845