Wanda’s ETEC 565- Learning Technologies Blog

Complete your final e-portfolio synthesis reflection, including the following items

 

1-2 paragraph précis of your flight path

My Goals from my original “Flight Plan”:

1. Examine why I would like to include additional learning technologies

• Student engagement, motivation
• Allow flexibility in terms of time, location, learning style, interest

We did examine the “why” and some of the required readings also touched on this subject and helped with background information.  For example, Siemens (2003) article talks in great detail about why you might choose to use various forms of media.

2. Examine how to choose one application over another

• Our division already has our LMS chosen (Moodle), so here I am referring more to the additional applications that can be included in Moodle (although additional Moodle experience is always welcomed)

Our time spend on Bates & Poole’s (2003) SECTIONS model really helps with the comparison of various applications.  The SECTION model provides a consistent and logical way to compare and evaluate technologies.

3. Choose a few learning technologies and dive in…..

Yes, we did dive in alright.  I have further examined Moodle, examined Everytrail (a very cool gps application), Photopeach, WordPress,  and then my nemesis, Prezi.

 

Reflection on your eLearning toolkit experience overall

• Learning Management System – Using Moodle to create a learning environment has been a very worthwhile experience. I have had previous Moodle experience, however each time I use Moodle I continue to learn new techniques and application ideas. For example, during this course I learned about a much more efficient way of importing quiz questions (called the Aiken method http://docs.moodle.org/en/Aiken). I have not yet experimented with this technique, however if it works it will save a lot of time (but images and feedback still have to be added separately)
• Web design and HTML authoring – With Moodle, creating a webpage is very easy. I appreciate the fact that I can use the wysiwyg editor for the majority of the creation, and then I can toggle over to the html editor if I need to embed a video or application.
• Synchronous Communication Tools – Moodle has a chat application that can easily be added directly to any course. This feature allows students and/or instructors to click into the chat room and engage in a real time text conversation. I have used this tool before and I find it is a great way to talk with students when you are online at the same time, and a student has a question. Chat sessions can also be archived, so if another student has the same questions, they can also access the previous chat session before asking the same question.
• Social Software – I enjoyed exploring the 50+ web 2.0 tools. These tools allow a student to show their learning in many different forms. These variations on the text-based environment allow us to provide learning experiences that can connect to various learning styles in a predominantly text-based online learning world.
• Weblogs – I can appreciate the blog application. It is a convenient place to store course reflections and thoughts about relevant resources. However, I cannot yet see a great application for these in Math and Science…. I believe we can accomplish the communication in our online discussion forums, and at this point I do not see a need for course blogs in my own courses.
• Wikis – The wiki assignment was interesting…. As mentioned in some of the course discussions, perhaps there would have been greater engagement with the Wiki if participants we not concerned about marks, but could comment based on their interest…. Also, it is not easy to edit someone’s work, especially when you do not know the other people, so in this case, may a wiki assignment within our small groups would be an interesting assignment.
• Multimedia and Authoring Tools – This was my favourite assignment. The digital story was also the most frustrating assignment. It was this experience with the digital story that reminded me to estimate the required time or projects a little more carefully. The digital story took me much longer to complete than I had anticipated. I can see where the creativity and ownership of the project would be very motivating for students (it was for me), and I am definitely going to use some of these tools in my courses. I can’t wait to see what the students produce.
• Accessibility -I found the information on W3C (Vanderheiden et al, 2008) frustrating and a bit overwhelming…. Some of their suggestions were vague,

Test: If non-text content is a test or exercise that would be invalid if presented in text, then text alternatives at least provide descriptive identification of the non-text content.

What does this mean?  How would this look.  I would like to see a Moodle site that is designed with accessibility in mind, and then perhaps I would have a better understanding of how to make my site as accessible as possible.  Of course I will try to do what I can (add in alternative text for images, etc).

 

Apply SECTIONS model to self-assess your portfolio, where applicable

I am interpreting this as question as we (MET students) are the “Students” since we are applying this to our own eportfolios. 

• S – Students: The students enrolled in the MET program are either already working with educational technology, or have an interest in it, so the hands on aspect of the eportfolio is an excellent fit for the MET students?
• E – Ease of use and reliability: WordPress has been very stable, so I would rate the reliability as high. As far as ease of use, there are some hassles (perhaps due to the double login or connection with WordPress and UBC’s Blog area). The hassles were workable, and I would continue to use this application for the blog site. I would likely include a little video demo about how to access it and how to flip from the actual site to the administration area.
• C – Costs: There was no cost associated with signing up for a WordPress account. I would imagine that there is a cost for IT help (the UBC helpdesk) for trouble shooting, and some cost for the instructor’s time to test out the application and set up the instructions and assignment to match the technology.
• T – Teaching and learning: The WordPress blogs are text based, however they do allow digital stories and images to be embedded, which helps the visual learners. WordPress allows for interaction between students and instructors with the comment feature. As mentioned earlier, perhaps a little video demo would help to orient the students to this new learning environment.
• I – Interactivity: The comment feature of WordPress allows for ongoing asynchronous conversations. WordPress also allows social software to be embedded (such as my EveryTrail project, PhotoPeach presentations, etc).
• O – Organizational issues: For UBC I would imagine it was time to set up passwords and connect the student blogs to UBC’s blog page. For the MET students to use the technology with their own students, it would depend on their context. For myself, I would need to discuss this with our IT department (after I has discussed the idea with my school administration). I would have to consider how to set up accounts (not using students’ real names, having access to the blogs password protected, and communicating with parents about the blog project).
• N – Novelty: Blogs have been around for quite some time, however the chance to use them in a school setting would likely be novel for many students. For myself as an MET student, I had set up a WordPress account before, but had never used it (not a huge blogging fan), and I did create a blog for a previous ETEC course, 533, I believe, so this technology was still pretty novel for me.
• S – Speed: The eportfolio technology (WordPress) was very efficient with respect to speed. I was able to add content and edit content quickly and at any time.

 

 

Describe next steps for you, in terms of your practice in educational technology

Next year I will continue with my position at our online school, but at 20% of my time.  30% of my time will be dedicated to developing a provincial distributed learning Math 10 course, and 50% of my time will be with an organization (NRLC) that arranges professional development opportunities for teachers.  With NRLC my time will be focused on distributed learning opportunities, so educational technology will have a large role in my position. 

I intend to help set up a provincial Moodle site for professional development, and I believe that I can model some of the application that we have been working with in ETEC 565, and hopefully provide more than just a “how to”, but also discuss the pedagogical reasons behind choosing certain applications.  Bates and Poole’s (2003) Section model will be helpful, as well as the Siemen’s article (2003) about the affordances and limitations of various applications.

 

Looking back, how does what you expected to learn during ETEC 565 compare to what you actually have learned, in terms of technical competencies?

ETEC 565 has met my learning expectations (see the flight plan reflections above).  I believe the usefulness of this course is directly related to the hands-on learning opportunities.  By using the technologies instead of just writing about them, we are able to see how they work in reality and how our theoretical expectations may not line up with the reality of using various technologies.  One example of this is time.  It is so easy to underestimate the time required to create a digital artifact.  Perhaps because we are imagining the best case scenario, or before we start using the technology we are not yet aware of the glitches that will slow us down.

 

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?

Even before my MET courses, I have felt strongly about having a purpose for including technology (not just for technology sake, but for a specific outcome or experience), however ETEC 565 has provided me with some tools to apply to decision making (the Sections model) in order to consistently consider many important variables. 

 

References

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. Available here.

Siemens, G. (2003). Evaluating Media Characteristics: Using multimedia to achieve learning outcomes. Elearnspace.   Accessed July 11, 2008, from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/mediacharacteristics.htm

Vanderheiden, G., Reid, L., Caldwell, B.; & Henry, S. (2008).  How to Meet WCAG 2.0.  Accessed July 21, 2008, from http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/