Looking Back
What struck me as particularly interesting in ETEC 565A was the ability to see various research pieces applied in a different and more practical context. I had read many of the key readings prior to this course. However, having various tools to apply theory to either on a scenario base or for actual use was something that stood as a unique, and particularly helpful, feature of this course.
When I look back to the beginning of this course, I see that in many ways I was quite naïve or arrogant about my own skill set. Perhaps some of my judgment was clouded as I dealt with a personal family issue and thus had some muddled thoughts about this course. Either way, I look back and see that I had lofty goals in my flight plan that need to be looked at some other time.
At the outset of the course, I believed that I was quite familiar with course sites and did not anticipate that an LMS, such as Moodle, would require a significant investment of time as I have already launched websites or wikis with most of my courses. I also use Google Apps for Education (GAFE) and thus I have some understanding of online, collaborative learning. I believed that I understood the key elements of online, or at least blended, learning. I had read Anderson’s (2008a) theory of online learning before and felt that I had a good grasp on the concepts and how they ought to play out in my own teaching situation. Thus, I had wanted to take some time in this course to focus on the issue of e-portfolios for high school students. This is an area that I am passionate about and am looking to take a lead at my school in facilitating. Thus, I did some initial research and found a lot of great resources that I could use.
Finally, I desired to continue the conversations regarding privacy laws and the publication of student work online. I was also intrigued by the use of social media in the classroom.
The Experience
ETEC 565A brought a number of key issues to the forefront for me. Firstly, my own course websites and wikis and use of GAFE are not at all like designing, building, and maintaining an LMS such as Moodle. While I had a lot of content to work with for launching an online version of my courses, the actual design and implementation of the course was a lot more time consuming than I had initially considered.
As I had reflected with the design of my introductory module, online learning is a somewhat of a new area for me to look at as an instructor. Thus, I wanted to approach with sound research. Thus, I appreciated Anderson’s (2008b) excellent expose on teaching in an online context. He writes that the “creation of an effective online educational community as involving three critical components: cognitive presences, social presence, and teaching presence” (Anderson, 2008b, p.343). These are the key areas I desired to focus on when designing my Moodle course. I also wanted to design something that looked and functioned differently than the current state of online courses in BC. Some research that I had done indicated a rather low completion rates for online courses in BC. I also discovered that one of the issues is that students go through the course at their own pace. Comparing the actual designs of courses to the literature indicated that changes were needed. Anderson (2008b) argues that in order for a community of inquiry to flourish, some of the affordances of online learning do need to be reduced. Thus, group-paced learning is something to be desired in order to design an effective online course.
With this background knowledge in place, along with Chickering and Gamson’s (1987) and Chickering and Ehrmann’s (1996) principles for good practice, I set out to outline the overall design and pacing of my Moodle course. This took a bit more time than I think the initial assignment aimed at, but in order for my introductory module to be complete, I felt that the overall sense of pacing in the entire course was needed. This time commitment early on, proved to quite valuable as I worked on my complete module for the course. I wanted to ensure that there elements in place to foster communication, build community, emphasize time on task, and communicate the high expectations that I believe all students in high school can achieve. With a solid background and pedagogical basis for the design of my course, I was able to shift my content and re-design some of my activities to better suit an online demographic.
Another key activity that I found quite valuable was learning to create a quiz within Moodle. Again, I underestimated the time I would need to complete this task. I was challenged to re-evaluate my own teaching and evaluation pedagogy. The Gibbs and Simpson (2005) reading caused me to re-think and re-imagine assessment. Designing assessment for an online environment posed a different set of challenges that are not always faced in a physical classroom. However, when I faced this task (and as noted in my reflection) the overall process was valuable as I learned to rewrite my own quiz questions and learned a variety of ways of giving feedback. Overall, the exposure to this tool really highlighted some of the unique features of offering a course within Moodle. Going forward, as my school contemplates some online courses, I now believe that I have some better insights into using Moodle as a platform.
However, I do believe that my regular exposure and application of the SECTIONS model by Bates and Poole (2003) in this course will prove to be of most use in assessing various possibilities for my school. I had covered this reading in a previous course, but this course provided regular (often weekly) reference to this great tool for assessing the viability of various technologies. I think that the regular reference to this article, and the particular focus during our group rubric creation assignment showed me the importance of being able to assess and evaluate a range of technologies from a mostly objective standpoint.
I was also able to use the SECTIONS model when creating my digital story. This was another activity that pushed me in my own ability to use and assess a range of tools. I found that knowing about more tools is helpful, but having a framework to decide on a tool is essential. In many ways, I think that at this point in the 21st century, we have too many tools and lack a solid pedagogical reasoning for using the tools that we use.
And thus, the use of the eLearning toolkit comes into play. I referred to this toolkit from time to time in the course, mostly while I was working within Moodle. As Natasha pointed out earlier on in the course, some aspects of the toolkit were dated. I noted that as well. There were some discussions regarding a variety of tools that I was quite comfortable with and some of the information was rather dated. I was also a bit confused as to what to do with some of these tools as I was under the impression that the design of our Moodle course was to stay, in as much as possible, within Moodle. The parts of the eLearning toolkit, which discussed various aspects of communication tools that one could implement in Moodle, were far too technical for me to understand. This highlights a need for me to become better versed in HTML/coding in order to maximize a greater range of technological tools for online courses. In other instances, I found that some of the tools references in the toolkit had instructions pertaining to previous versions of Moodle. Overall, I found that my key questions regarding Moodle were solved via my social/personal-learning network.
As I mentioned at the outset of this reflection and in my flight plan, I was interested in the discussions we were to have regarding social media. I am a regular Twitter user as a professional educator and as a student. My personal/professional learning network (PLN) proved to be a valuable resource during this course. I was able to even connect with a fellow classmate via Twitter on a regular basis. Together we were able to troubleshoot a variety of issues within Moodle and to discuss ETEC 565A beyond the discussion forums. This highlights the power of Twitter and shows how it definitely functions within higher education and as teaching professionals.
I did enjoy the range of discussions we had in the course about the pros and cons of using social media with elementary and high school aged students, and I think that is an ongoing discussion. Again, being exposed to a range of tools and being able to expand my own PLN are two valuable insights that I have garnered from this course.
Looking Ahead
Interestingly enough, as this course begins to wind down, discussions at my school have been winding up in terms of course offerings and logistical issues going into next year. As a small, independent school we are somewhat limited in how many courses we can offer but we do our best to offer a broad range of courses. One area that we saw a need for improvement was to open up more senior humanities based courses along with a few more options for the different streams of math. The idea of some online, modular based learning being offered from our school was bandied about.
So, it looks like my exposure to Moodle may come to good use quite quickly. Discussions between our various departments and our IT coordinator have started and we are essentially using the SECTIONS model from Bates and Poole (2003) to evaluate whether or not to go with Moodle or to use our current system of wikis and services that we use with GAFE. Again, this course has equipped me to bring in valuable perspectives that I simply would not have had even twelve weeks ago.
Regardless of the direction we go, I am hoping to take time to finish up my Socials 11 course either through a school-based server or on my own personal server. Given that I have a new vision for online education for BC, I think it would be a shame for me to leave behind what I have developed thus far.
As I mentioned earlier, my initial plan to assess and evaluate ePortfolios did not come to fruition this semester. It is an idea that my school is still quite interested in and thus I am somewhat in charge of looking at the process of putting this together. As I noted in my flight plan, I have a number of initial articles and links to work with and, again, the SECTIONS model from Bates and Poole (2003) will come in handy as we determine an adequate set of tools to work with.
Overall, with my exposure to Levine’s 50 ways to tell a story, I am, again, encouraged to broaden my own understanding and familiarity with using a wide range of tools. This fits well with the technology standards for teachers developed by ISTE (2008). This course has ensured that I continue to push my own technical competencies.
As I reflected on earlier, I have realized that I do need to broaden my technical competencies to include some more knowledge of coding. Perhaps, once I have finished MET in the summer of 2015, I’ll look to complete some coursework in coding and HTML.
Finally, I hope to familiarize myself more with FOIPPA and continue the discussion around its feasibility in terms of the reality of 21st century technologies and cloud-based storage. I believe that more research and understanding of technology is needed in order for educators and government personnel to draft meaningful and accurate legislation that protects students without limiting the availability of excellent tools.
Overall, I believe that I am better equipped for my lifelong journey as a learner and as an educational leader. This past spring I joined our Christian Schools Professional Development Planning Team and with the massive changeover on that team have found myself to be playing a key role at this time. I am excited for the future of education at all levels and look forward to continuing to use the theory in practical endeavours.
References
Anderson, T. (2008a). Toward a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson (Ed.), Theory and practice of online learning (pp. 45-74). Retrieved from http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/ch2.html
Anderson, T. (2008b) Teaching in an Online Learning Context. In T. Anderson (Ed.), Theory and practice of online learning (pp. 45-74). Retrieved from http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/ch14.html
Bates, A. W., & Poole, G. (2003). A framework for selecting and using technology. In Effective teaching with technology in higher education: Foundations for success (pp. 75-105). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7. Retrieved from http://www.aahea.org/articles/sevenprinciples1987.htm
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 from http://www.aahea.org/articles/sevenprinciples.htm
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2005). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 3-31. Retrieved from http://www.open.ac.uk/fast/pdfs/Gibbs%20and%20Simpson%202004-05.pdf
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2008). Standards for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/standards-for-teachers