Post your answer to the questions regarding the two videos here.
To what extent are the teachers in these two videos using the components of their OLE? Are they adhering to the values and principles of open learning?
Posted in: General, Week 12:
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Before you publish your posting, please make sure that you select a category (eg. Introductions) as well as assign some meaningful tags (keywords).
 | joeltremblay on Week 11: Voice |
| joeltremblay on A3 Elevator and Venture |
 | manny on Photo App Elevator and Venture… |
 | adi on My last participation :-( |
| adi on My last participation :-( |
kstackhouse 7:31 am on November 19, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Having personally used Twiducate (stopped using because it was too slow to load), Edmodo, and to a limited extent wikis I think that the teachers in this example were using the tools as OLEs. They were using constructivist and connectivist principles in their use of allowing students to work, collaborate, and engage with the materials. One boy mentioned being able to get his quiz results right away so he knew how he was doing. I used the same feature in Edmodo and students could check their score and they could try again if they felt like they had a better handle on the material later on. I also loved the badge feature in Edmodo and we had fun creating badges and how they would earn them. I used this as a way to help them decide what would be considered milestones in the course. I also loved being away from school and having students ask me questions on Edmodo that I was able to answer for them while waiting in the Dentist’s office. Parents loved the fact that their students were so engaged with the course materials and connecting with their peers in relation to the topics and activities. Text notifications and the mobile app made Edmodo a great choice in my high school setting.
adi 3:08 pm on November 19, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I agree, these platforms are great for keeping communication channels open and immediate, and I can see how parents and teachers love them. It’s also interesting that you’ve used these OLEs; you can give us a hand-on opinion. Do you feel one or the other is better suited for creating an OLE in all the sense of the word? In other words, using it not only as a means of communication or for uploading material, which one teacher mentioned, but to provide enabling context, resources and tools to enhance learning?
kstackhouse 5:18 pm on November 19, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I am not sure I could speak on one being more suitable for OLE than the other. I think that each one could be used in the sense described by the group’s presentation. I think it depends on the teacher and how they have approached using the resources. I think each one has its merits, and would recommend Edmodo for class use. One of my students said it was like having FB in the classroom. He was excited to be using it…and Macbeth was not his favourite unit, so having Edmodo in place was something that encouraged him to participate when he might not have otherwise.
adi 6:14 am on November 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I found that interesting, too; that students say it reminds them of FB. I’ve taught English Lit, too. How did you use Edmodo for ‘Macbeth’ that you think made it more fun for your students?
kstackhouse 11:49 am on November 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
We had links to external sites (videos, virtual tours, recordings, etc…) available in their resources that they were able to follow. Each asked them to respond to certain points in the play. For the biggest part the ability to check with their peers was the most engaging part. Shakespeare should be seen and heard, so reading it at home by yourself is tough for many students.
Peggy Lawson 7:52 pm on November 19, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Some of the comments that struck me while watching the videos was how the teacher used the sites to engage the students in various ways. Posting student photos in , for example, Edmodo helped draw the students to the site, which then held all relevant materials – notes, self-test quizzes (great for automatic feedback for students), calendar (to help develop time-management skills), etc.
Collaboration was another key point – how the students posted questions that other students helped answer, and the wiki annotations that promoted constructivist learning.
I’ll add one more, regarding how the online discussions and wiki annotating gave students time to think before they posted, unlike live classroom discussions. To me that is a huge plus of LMS systems and other online discussions, like our course blog here. Everyone can have a voice, not just those who can sometimes dominate all classroom discussions.
adi 7:16 am on November 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
It’s interesting you used the term LMS. Different web sites you look at will refer to these online platforms as either an LMS , CMS or even as Social Netwroks. Then I came across the following PPT that explains the difference between an LMS and a CMS http://www.slideshare.net/ebloomsie/lms-vs-cms-a-summary#btnNext, and what stuck out was that in their opinion, an LMS manages learners while a CMS manages content, and the latter lends itself for greater content creation. Would you agree? Could this be the success of platforms like Edmodo and Schoology vs LMS like Blackboard, Connect or Vistas? Are LMS the best option for creating an OLE?
Peggy Lawson 5:48 pm on November 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Thanks for the link Adrianna. I don’t know if the slideshare convinced me of significant differences between an LMS and CMS, but I’ll admint my own personal experience is much more on the LMS side (Blackboard & Moodle); from the video glimpses of Edmodo and Schoology I didn’t notice much difference in functionality than what I can accomplish in Blackboard with it’s discussion boards, grouping functionality, calendar, wikis (in the newer Blackboard), blogs, etc.
adi 9:15 am on November 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I’m also not totally sure of the difference, as I have also only had experience with LMS. However, my impression is that a LMS is considered more on the administrative side and a lot more fixed in terms of content creation than an LMS. However, I agree with you in terms of functionality. If anything, when I first watched the first video, if felt that more the teacher was using it a repository tool. This alone is not adhering to the principles of an OLE, it’s simply uploading and depositing materials but not necessarily enhancing learning. Thoughts?
avninder 10:35 am on November 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I think both teachers used their respective OLEs appropriately as many of the acitivities were rooted in constructivism. There were also opportunities for the students to start new discussions and reflect which demonstrates the “open”ness of an open learning environment. However, it seemed as though the instructor using Edmodo used many other features availble such as the calendar and posting videos. I’m not sure that this means she used the OLE more appropriately but I think it may have resulted in students being more engaged in the site itself not just the subject matter.
adi 9:21 am on November 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I personally felt the first teacher used the tool as repository, while the second teacher had students constructing knowledge together. Effectively, we do not get to see exactly how the first teacher actually used the tools and what the content of what she uploaded consisted of. For example, what exactly did they do with the videos she posted? Engagement, however, is indeed important, and she does appear to achieved that.
Scott 1:23 pm on November 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I’m working to compare the two videos, however I remain unclear about the definition of enabling contexts, as referred to in the interactivity question and the Slideshare slides.
The Slideshare presentation notes that enabling contexts can be externally imposed (which I understand); however, both externally induced and individually generated contexts, involve the learner generating the problem – so what is the difference between the two then? Can anyone clarify these definitions with an example perhaps?
Patrick Pichette 5:17 pm on November 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Hi Scott,
With externally induced contexts, students are provided with a relevant problem space without being given any particular problem to solve. It is clear from the problem space that there are issues to work but students are encouraged to describe and delimit the problems while working towards solving them afterwards.
For individually generated contexts, students identify their own context based on particular needs and circumstances for the subject matter that they are currently involved with.
Patrick Pichette 5:23 pm on November 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
In other words, the difference is strictly in whether the problem space has been pre-defined by the instructor (externally induced) or if the student is the one defining the problem space (individually generated).
The similarity lies in the fact that for both externally induced and individually generated contexts, students are the ones defining the processes and tasks to solve the issue. With externally imposed contexts, the student is given both the problem space as well as the processes and tasks.
Scott 7:46 pm on November 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Thanks for your explanations Patrick.
I’m afraid however, I’m still just not clear on the subtleties of the distinction here. Any chance you can offer a real world example of each?
adi 9:07 am on November 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Probably the best way to describe the three types of enabling context is in terms of how much learning is controlled, and how teacher or learner centered they are. In the case of externally imposed enabling contexts, the instructor/domain provides both the problem and the means for solving it; in externally induced enabling contexts, the instructor generates the context, but the learner generates the problem to be addressed; finally, in individually generated enabling contexts, the learner generates both the context ad problem.
An example of externally imposed enabling contexts are simulation learning games where students adopt a role within the environment and the problem and/or performance needs are explicitly delineated. A good example of this is “The Great Solar System Rescue” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj0Plod9YjY .
In externally induced enabling contexts may consist of scenarios, problems or cases where the learner generates the situation to be solved and the means to do it. An example of this is “The Adventures of Jasper Woodbury” http://mmcisaac.faculty.asu.edu/disted/week1/5focustc.html.
In the case of individually generated enabling contexts, the specific context cannot be provided in advance because the instructor cannot know what it will be; the learner establishes the enabling context based on needs. Personal interests, issues or problems guide the strategies employed, be it a graduate student’s research interest, or a person wishing to solve a personal problem, e.g. planning a 3 day hiking trip.
Hope this helps.
Scott 7:13 pm on November 21, 2012 Permalink
Indeed, these explanations and examples have helped me a great deal – thank you 🙂
teacherben 7:03 pm on November 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
it seems to me that most of the people using Edmodo were doing much the same thing online that they already did in the classroom. It was being used as a productivity tool more than anything else, but most of the functionality that has highlighted by the users could just as easily be done using more traditional tools. Students commented on how much they like the calendar features. Teachers liked being able to post assignments and give quizzes. This is nothing really new.
On the other hand, the wikis afforded the possibility of the collective construction of knowledge that is central to Constructivist pedagogy. Students shared their own original thoughts and feelings about poetry, they contributed their own research through social bookmarks. This teacher was essentially crowdsourcing the unit and students were given much more ownership over how the unit evolved over time.
adi 9:34 am on November 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
My impression was similar. What’s more, I came across lost of examples where teachers use Edmodo as a repository platform and tool for communicating with students, but do not exploit its full potential. On the other hand, I found an example where a Social Studies teacher creates enabling context that promotes divergent and mediated learning, amongst other things. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7scmRQkTaU&feature=plcp
Thought from people on other ways these platforms could be used as more than just repository platforms?
Mike Rae 2:22 am on November 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I agree with Ben that the wiki was more constructive than the edmodo, but I think that both would qualify as OLEs. Both platforms encouraged students to work together and ‘off’ of each other. By the teacher in the wiki giving instruction to annotate the poem, we saw how ‘friends’ in the class were able to communicate with each other about the line, building on each others comments.
I thought that it was cool that two friends in the class would never call each other up at night to discuss what the last line of homework meant to them, but through this OLE, it gave them the opportunity to discuss it.
The similarity to Facebook is a huge advantage of these environments to make students comfortable and familiar with the idea of logging in and posting, checking notifications, messages, and interacting with each other. I thought the teacher’s idea of posting pictures was an interesting hook to get students coming back to the edmodo, but where does the line get drawn of it becoming a social networking site or an educational site? maybe it HAS to be both?
Thoughts?
adi 9:59 am on November 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Interesting point. In this blog http://www.edmodo.com/public/wazmac-demo/group_id/1224665 , they mention that edmodo is marketed as ‘Social Networking for Schools’ and that Schoology leans more towards LMS with a social network feel to it. As to where the line is drawn, I feel depends on the teacher; both can co-exist. Aside from the social studies example role play I mentioned in a rely to Ben, there’s this one http://www.edmodo.com/public/wazmac-demo/group_id/1224665 where admittedly the teacher has used it a repository platform, but carefully put together to create externally imposed enabling context with a specific problem for students to work on, and aside from the video provided, this teacher also provides additional resources http://www.edmodo.com/folder/456542 . So I guess if properly used, you can combine its uses.
teacherben 6:22 pm on November 22, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
No question, Edmodo qualifies and I’m confident that many teachers are using it effectively. It even allows students and teachers to communicate across different schools, if enabled. There’s a lot of potential there. I just didn’t see that in the video.
I had a particularly positive experience many years ago when I set up something called Elgg on my own server. It is a social network that looks a lot like Facebook did back in the early days. Nice, simple, clean. I just threw it at my students with no real idea how they would use it. On their own, they started to meet up in the evenings to discuss homework assignments. Another teacher and I ended up joining in for 20 minute blocks each evening to answer questions and offer support, but it was the kids that originally set things up (grade 5 kids, if you ca believe it.) They created their own groups based on their own interests and some of those did take off. In some cases, a group was created, people joined and within a week, it was dead, but others remained active. This is not unlike what we find on any social network. They used it to meet up on weekends and used it to share music and pictures and all sorts of stuff. At the end of the year, I set up a new system with a new database for the next class and forgot about it. But a few months later, logged in to find out that these kids were still using it–even some kids who had moved away to other schools were using it as a way to stay in touch. I think this was very empowering for the students and really did highlight the power of student-centered teaching tools. These days, all of my kids use Facebook, so anything I introduce would come off as artificial. At the same time though, I don’t want to use Facebook to engage with them since I have my own, private life on there. I know that many of them use it as a tool to share their learning and support one another though.
jenbarker 11:34 am on November 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
After reviewing the videos, I am in agreement with both Mike and Ben. I found the first video (Edmodo) did NOT demonstrate very many OLE values. The features of the calendar, ability to view grades, and see homework is simply organization and may assist in increasing students self-regulated learning skills. All of these features were imposed by the teacher and didn’t allow for personal inquiry or divergent thinking. Never was it mentioned that students were using Edmodo create or generate content. Although I liked that the teacher mentioned that she was sharing photos/celebrating the learning happening in the classroom on Edmodo I think should she have provided the students the ability to post similar photos, it would have represented learner autonomy and self-directed learning as the students would be able to pick and choose what they would like to share and evaluate the learning by discussing why they chose the photos they shared. Overall the first video didn’t represent to me meaningful values characteristic of OLEs.
jenbarker 11:44 am on November 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I believe the second video is far more representative of the values of OLE. The teacher mediated the learning but by encouraging the students to make their own annotations she encouraged divergent thinking. The students had autonomy to choose which part of the poems they wanted to respond to. It allowed for communication between members of the class and allowed for all the voices of the classroom to be heard. The activity had the students generating content through a concrete experience.
adi 9:38 am on November 22, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Your observations are very good. If you look at the slide, and the differences between ‘directed’ and ‘open elarning’, then it would appear the teacher in video one does appear to be ‘carefully engineering external conditions’, while the teacher in the second video provides opportunities for ‘manipulation and experimenting’. In the end, it’s like any tool; it’s how you use it. Before it was blackboards and textbooks, now this. Are there better tools than others? Some argue, for example, that an LMS structure is too rigid for creating an OLE and has to many restrictions for plug ins etc. What do you think given your experience with the different platforms MET uses?
frank 8:09 pm on November 23, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I think we are seeing the evolution of some interesting tools in this course, though we may not be using them directly because switching back and forth between them might add confusion given our constraint that we only communicate online. I would love to see our postings get upvotes & downvotes by the class, so that we can each get some sort of feedback on our work, for example.
I think you are right to juxtapose the differences between (very) directed learning in video one vs. open learning in video two Adelpaso. In that regard, it seems to me that the tool being used does matter. In the Second video, we see much greater application of OLE principles and values as Jen has pointed out, whereas in video one, we pretty much see a typical class do things they would otherwise do, with online tools. If OLE’s have the potential to facilitate an evolution in learning towards say social constructivism, then how they are engineered and designed matters.
Scott 8:06 pm on November 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I have quickly summarize the OLE values of each video presented as follows:
Video 1 – Edmodo
Resources: Handouts, Weblinks
Tools: Quizes, Calendars, Polls, Discussions, Notepad, Grading, Blogs, Help Forums, Notifications
Scaffolds: Help forums, Quiz Feedback, Notifications
Enabling Context: Teachers provided some problems and the Edmodo platform encouraged externally induced contexts, allowing the students to generate problems to be addressed using the peer directed forums.
Video 2 – WiKi
Resources: Weblinks, Handouts
Tools: Collaborative text editing and used external social bookmark tool called Digo.
Scaffolds: Structured Units and Collaborative Emphasis
Enabling Context: Highly teacher generated problems, leading to externally imposed contexts, facilitated by Digo tool.
Based on the information presented in the videos, in my opinion the Edmodo platform is richer in its OLE tools and affordances to learners than the Wiki platform. I was already familiar with both OLEs, however I was to unaware of the Digo social markup and bookmarking tool used in the Wiki video. It seemed easy to use, engaging and effective. It’s a site that I have added to my own toolbox of online resources and one I’d recommend to colleagues. It also reminded me, that sometimes the simplest tools work the best.
As a final comment, while I appreciate that the Edmodo platform was agreeable to students due its similarity to Facebook, I’m not entirely convinced that a Facebook style environment is what I really want in my classroom. It also raises questions about who is going to moderate and be responsible for all the social oriented content that will be generated while students are logging it outside of class.
manny 9:00 pm on November 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Hi Scott,
You hit a great point in terms of the similarities between such as edmodo/schoology to facebook. The obvious advantage is the hope that the learning curve wont be too much for students and it is something that is comfortable and inviting for them to use. I have tried Wiki’s and WordPress in the classroom and they didn’t quite work to the same effect. The point about discussion moderation is a BIG issue that seems to arise whenever one considers using these platforms. A lot of teachers are against utilizing such platforms as they don’t want the headache or responsibility of moderating discussions outside the classroom. Personal discussions on such sites is definitely a concern and the parameters of usage would have to be clearly laid out before jumping into such platforms headfirst.
adi 10:07 am on November 22, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Great summary Scott; you’ve really grasped the concept. I only just recently started using Diigo http://www.diigo.com/ (changed over from Delicious), and it is indeed an amazing tool. Here’s an example of what someone from ETEC 540 did with Diigo http://slides.diigo.com/list/mrspen/collective-wisdom-teaching-blogs-for-elementary
And adding to your summary, I thought I’d share a mind map I made of what an OLE is; I also find summaries useful http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/254/openlearningenvironment.jpg/
Scott 12:50 pm on November 22, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Thanks for the feedback and mind map – it’s terrific!
manny 8:50 pm on November 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The Edmodo and Wiki examples given in this activity strongly emphasize the collaborative features that OLE’s afford. When comparing this style of teaching to direct instruction, it is evident that there is much more interaction occurring between peers than in the traditional learning environment. According to the definition “OLEs aim to provide learners with opportunities to learn by solving both well and ill-defined problems, by interacting with resources, tools and peers, and by collaborating with others. The videos presented showcase students interacting with the resources and each other but the problems presented seem defined. I have seen examples of moodle, edmodo, and schoology used in instructional practice and noticed that it is usually a compilation of teacher activities presented on an online platform. This is still a step ahead of direct instruction but I think the true power of these tools lies in the ability of students to collaborate in inquiry based learning through the presentation of ill-defined problems.
adi 10:51 am on November 22, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I agree, it is ‘a step ahead’ , but we do have a long way to go. Some believe the problem resides in the fact that constructivism (an underlying learning theory of OLEs) is a learning theory, but not an Instructional Design Model. It comes back to applying theory to practice, or teaching as you preach. It’s not easy and often involves a lot more work on the part of the teacher.
jhodi 5:08 pm on November 23, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
You are correct in that we still have some work to do in moving away from direct instruction. I try as much as possible to create activities for my own students that require groups of students working together to solve a problem. I encourage students to use eachother as learning tools as well as their own math base to learn how others view a problem and how they can learn from their peers. I have noticed however, when the math concepts get more and more difficult, it can be harder to develop genuine activities that fit into the time constraints of a class. Developing these activities can also be quite time-consuming compared to direct instruction, but very worth it!
rebeccaharrison 10:46 pm on November 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I agree with most that both sites showcase some OLE values, however the second video presented a model I would be more interested in using in my classroom because it allows students to be more collaborative and invested in the process of creating a learning environment. Each individual in the class is then responsible for the content and flow of the site. In addition to concerns noted above with moderation, I would also be somewhat concerned with accessibility for students and also requiring students to have more “screen time” outside of the classroom to be able to keep up with expectations in the classroom.
adi 10:55 am on November 22, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
You point out something important: ‘time’. These tools are great, but they do often require a longer time commitment on the part of the student. I don’t know about you, but I have never dedicated so much time to any f2f course I’ve taken as I have with MET. Keeping up with posts, readings, assignments, evaluations; it’s often quite overwhelming!
Jonathan 7:41 pm on November 22, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Rebecca and Adel —
From what I’ve observed of the two videos Edmodo is being used as a repository but it isn’t clear how she is further bringing out constructivist aspects. What is exciting in all of this is that she has them engaged. The second step to bring out the constructivism wouldn’t be too far away. While she never explicitly states what types of projects she is engaging in like the Wiki video — she can easily implement the constructivist aspects into her Edmodo. I haven’t personally used it, but I have viewed classrooms that do use it.
I do, however, have Wiki experience and I do initially use it as a repository and build out from it. As the students get more familiar with it — the projects become more complex (to a certain extent as they are only Grade 2). The important point is to draw upon the engagement because after that having them work in it is simply taking the next step.
Having used the Wiki, I can say that it is difficult to maintain a dialogue. It is good when students are able to meet F2F and discuss what is happening on a page/project and move forward. I can see many benefits coming out of Edmodo as it provides a more streamlined conversation. These sites merely becoming a launching point for students to engage in more constructivist learning. It isn’t about just using these tools but mashing them all up!
adi 8:13 pm on November 22, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Good point about sometimes needing to meet f2f; blended learning and complete online learning are not the same. A blended learning OLE is probably easier to achieve than one that is solely online.
tomwhyte1 11:51 am on November 22, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
For myself, both of these tools Edmodo/Wikis(Other Embedded Tools) provide the technology to potentially allow a teacher to create a Open Learning Environment, however it is important that neither of these tools on their own are Open Learning Environments. For it is how the tool is used, that creates the environment, not the tool itself. For a hammer is not a home, but a hammer provides the ability to create a home.
Contexts – both can be a repository for assignments that have internal – external – or even student directed contexts. However, I do believe that the Wiki environment does provide a better OLE – in that students can use this environment for all forms of the work, where Edmodo at best, would be a delivery mechanism for assignments students completed elsewhere.
Resources/Tools: Both are web based, and therefore all various internal and external resources to be utilized to assist learning. However, again I believe the inherent functionality of Wiki’s provide more flexibility in this regard.
Scaffolds – for myself, this is based again on the teacher and the assignments they provide, not the resource itself. Therefore, I feel the judgement on this area should be focused on the classroom teacher, not the resource delivering their pedagogical approach.
Thoughts?
adi 8:05 am on November 23, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Excellent observation regarding judging the teacher rather than the resource. While putting together material for this project I came across some very creative uses of all these tools, adhering very much to the values and principles of OLEs. So I guess you won’t achieve the values of an OLE unless you use its components accordingly. However, all the marketing out there sell you LMS and CMS as if alone they can enhance learning. Not so, as you rightly point out. Thanks.
visramn 7:19 pm on November 22, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I believe these teacher did a good job of using all the different components of their OLE’s to engage their learners. Both of these online learning environments included tools that allowed for students to collaborate and to have a voice. They both allowed for students to work at their own pace. Students could relate to the OLE’s because they saw them as being similar to social interfaces they use in everyday life, such as Facebook. Therefore, drawing the students in and making them more interested in the information and tasks presented. The teachers posted videos and other interactive and visual tools that helped reach out to different types of learners with different learning styles. The calender feature was a great way of helping students with accountability and with insuring they completed their assignments ( this method sure beats having to run after students and repeatedly reminding them to hand in assignment). I think the teachers did a great job of using the OLE functioning capabilities to set up an effective learning environment. Their efforts and proper use of the OLE was evident from their students success and positive outlook on learning The thing that stuck out to me the most was the comment one of the girls made in the Wiki video about being able to think about what they are writing and post more thoughtful comment. I think this is one major benefits of online leaning environment. A lot of students who may not voice their opinions in traditional learning environment may do so online because they have time to compose their thoughts and they do not feel like they are being watched by their peers or being judged.
Nureen
adi 8:07 am on November 23, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Good observation; time to reflect is important. You probably would not get so much participation in a f2f class; especially with the shy students.
jenniferschubertubc 9:50 am on November 23, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
One word that jumped out at me in the discussion of these tools was “community.” When I reflect upon my experience as a student in the classroom, I can remember feeling like I was part of a social community but not necessarily a learning one. I feel like, in those days, assignments were handed out and completed. In my case, being a very young perfectionist, there was always a healthy dose of competition involved. I can remember some teachers posting top ten lists of who achieved the best scores on tests. It was meant as a motivational tool, but I can now see where it created a separation, or a type of “every man for himself” feel to our success in the classroom.
What I enjoy most about hearing about the use of OLEs in the classroom is the excitement from the students in regards to their use. In both videos, students extolled the virtues of collaboration and learning not only from the one teacher standing at the front of the classroom, but from each other. I think, regrettably, that many students of my generation find this a foreign concept. It wasn’t until I started my studies in the MET program that I began to see the value in sharing ideas, experiences and knowledge. Gone was the competition, leaving more room for scaffolding knowledge from that of others.
One of my main motivations for enrolling in MET studies was to ignite a fire in teachers who are scared/tentative to use new technologies in the classroom. It surprised and saddened me to find so many of my colleagues against continued learning in this realm, relegated and comfortable in their long term teaching routines. Whether we like it or not, the times are changing; students are becoming more and more comfortable with technology and spend a large amount of their free time using it to connect with friends and live their lives. If we can successfully pair social technology with educational technology in OLEs, it will be much easier to reach even the more reluctant students as we’ll be meeting them on common ground and in their comfort zone, so to speak.
Lisa Nevoral 11:55 pm on November 25, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Hi Jennifer,
I too see the value in sharing ideas, experiences, and knowledge online and think there are some students that may feel more comfortable sharing their ideas or thoughts online than a f2f class. It gives them a chance to think about their responses, search out answers, and reflect upon what others have written. I have found in the MET program that I do all three, as well as learn from others. What I would like to see more of is how OLEs can be used for student-directed learning. I guess what I’m searching for is more “concrete” examples.
Lisa
jhodi 4:56 pm on November 23, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
It seems that these teachers are using these learning tools as OLE’s. These teachers are creating an atmosphere for students to collaborate and that encourage participation and interest from the students. The students seem to enjoy having all of the material outlined for them, but take responsibility for their own learning and ensure that they are using the tools provided to them by their teachers to the best of their abilities. The social networking atmosphere of Edmodo really creates a positive collaborative community space for students to engage with their material and peers. These tools rely on the use of consistent routines for the students that help support each learner to succeed. The online nature allows students the freedom to work from anywhere, but holds them accountable for keeping up to date in the class.
jameschen 1:55 am on November 25, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
One of the things I noticed in both of the videos is the increased level of engagement for all the students interviewed. By making good use of the affordances offered by the tools they had, the teachers framed lessons so that students found themselves using the platforms to track their learning progress and collaborate with each other even when they were away from school. This shows that the teachers were able to go beyond the principles of OLE.
James
Lisa Nevoral 5:17 pm on November 25, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Hey All,
In video #1, the school used Edmodo. I think the teachers were adhering to many of the OLE principles. They included resources, such as links to websites and videos or posted their own notes for absent students. They used tools to gauge student levels such as quizzes and polls. The calendar allowed students to see what was coming up, what their assignments were, and when their assignments were due. Students were able to post questions to the teacher or whole class for help or clarification; therefore, collaboration was occurring. What I was unsure of was how much self-discovery was actually occurring or if it was mostly teacher driven.
In video #2, the teacher used a wiki site. Her example was using collaborative skills where students could post their own ideas or respond to others. Students were interacting and discussing online which allowed them to maybe pick up on new ideas or information that they hadn’t thought about before.
It appeared to me that there was lots of student engagement and the teachers used the sites in slightly different ways. As well, I think some students may feel more comfortable to participate or answer questions than they do in a f2f classroom.
Lisa