Erin’s Educational Technology Journey

Reflective blog question

Think about an example of how multimedia have been used effectively to enhance your learning. Feel free to reflect on your MET experiences, or any other.

     Multimedia has greatly enhanced my learning experience. Reflecting on my undergraduate degrees (1998 and 2003), I can say very little multimedia was used: video, MS Power Point presentations and e-mail between classmates. In the University of British Columbia’s MET program I have been exposed to a much wider range of multimedia. It is obvious that this is to be expected considering the focus of MET (educational technology) and the expertise of my instructors. However, I also feel more multimedia learning opportunities should have been provided to me during my 2003 B.Ed program. Although I have not researched the issues, my best guess is the faculty were not comfortable with different multimedia formats, the technology has become cheaper and easier to use since 2003 and the university itself was generally not engaged in a cultural shift toward educational technology practices. The following reflection will focus on my experience learning with multimedia in the MET program.

In MET I have been exposed to a wide variety of multimedia: synchronous and asynchronous video streaming, learning management systems and software (Wimba, Moodle, Chat/Voice), text in websites and e-mail, audio applications (streamed MP3’s, VoiceTool), visuals (Flash animations, CMaps), collaborative applications (wikis, blogs, shared websites) and integration of these formats.

I feel I have had a more effective learning experience because of the variety of formats. An excellent example is an activity in ETEC 565 at the beginning of the course. I was part of a group that had to assess different learning management systems. We decided to meet online using a Vista discussion forum, then we used a chat function and google documents (collaborative editing) at the meeting to work on our assignment. As we discussed issues in chat we drafted, edited and finalized our paper. We were scattered around the globe and we had different professional backgrounds, but the ability to learn and create with multimedia brought us together and truly enabled our collaborative efforts.

Generally speaking, I am a visual learner. I can process information more quickly, and I like to watch a skill step-by-step and master it in stages. An excellent example of learning with visual multimedia in MET is the use of archived lessons with chat and video streaming capabilities. Living in a different time zone and not working in a school seriously limits my ability to participate in a supportive educational technology (ed-tech) environment. However, the MET community is supportive, approachable and available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Despite this, occasionally I am unable to meet during live, online activities.

Multimedia has enabled synchronous lessons and community participation to become asynchronous. Lessons include video, so I can see exactly what the presenter is discussing. Without MET’s multimedia culture, I would have to rely on text based websites, blogs or forums outside of the program. I would feel dislocated from my community and somewhat lost academically. With asynchronous visual multimedia I can access archived lessons and e-mail participants (or post in a forum) for clarification and further support. Actually, I could request a meeting online using Wimba or outside of Vista with Skype if further visual support was needed.

Reflecting on my MET experience (8 classes) with multimedia, I tend to agree with Siemens’ (2003) analysis of the benefits and drawbacks of certain applications. Siemens (2003) argues text is portable but overused. I have had one heavily text-based course in MET and I consider it the least engaging. I do not remember many of the modules and I have to return to my files to review key articles and arguments. Reflecting on this experience, I feel text on a website or in a textbook has value, but should be integrated with other multimedia forms.

Audio is considered key for auditory learners and beneficial for all due to its speed (Siemens, 2003). I would add to this the benefit of portability. In MET I have downloaded several MP3 files and listened to them more than once while doing day-to-day tasks. Siemens (2003) feels learners may tune out, and I have. Again, I listen to them more than once due to their portability.

Visual and video learning in MET, for me, is the highlight. I have watched Prezi presentations (visual presentation software), archived video-based lessons, studied CMaps (mind maps) and enjoyed a variety of digital stories through iMovies, Windows Movie Maker, Roxio Photo Show, MS Power Point and other slide show applications. A picture is worth a thousand words as I am a visual learner. Without this form of learning, I know I would not have explored concepts as deeply due to inattention or boredom. Visual presentations are engaging and are often followed up in forum discussions. I can re-watch the material, process the theory or message and engage in thoughtful discussions with my peers. If the same material was presented in text, I would likely read it twice yet not process the material as deeply. The level of learning engagement would be low. Siemens (2003) feels visual and video formats benefit visual learners and are personal but they are also expensive and can be difficult to download (quality issues). I feel visuals and videos do not have to be expensive, but at the institutional level this may not be the case. Student productions (which I learn a great deal from) are often created using open source (OS) applications with minimal cost. Since I have taken the MET program, I have encouraged my teaching colleagues to include more video and visual in their lessons through the use of OS applications!

Finally, I strongly feel collaborative and integrated media formats have positively enhanced my learning experience during the MET program. In ETEC 510 I was introduced to and participated in my first wiki. From that experience, I taught my colleagues about wikis and started a program at my former school. In ETEC 531 and 565 I was introduced to blogging. Although I am a visual learner, I enjoy visiting the blogs of other students and I’m thrilled when people comment on my blog. This form of feedback is spread across blog comments, Vista forums and instant messaging outside of Vista, and I feel it’s an excellent example of integration. My previous example about integrating Vista forums with a chat function and a google document for synchronous editing is another example of how collaboration (and integration) enhance the learning process. I am not learning alone. My learning is scaffolded, occurs in a supportive environment and is on-going. Without collaboration and integration, I would not have such rich learning opportunities. Siemens (2003) feels collaboration is hard to manage but integration of formats can improve management issues and minimize the drawbacks of other formats. I completely agree with Siemens (2003) on the benefits of integration. Personally, collaboration has been enhanced in my MET experiences by the integration of several multimedia formats.

To conclude my reflection, I feel my experience learning with multimedia has been intimidating at times but extremely rewarding. Learning new formats can be daunting, but I have improved my ability to select multimedia applications based on Bates & Pooles’ (2003) SECTIONS framework. I have taken the skills gained in MET and used them immediately in my teaching or passed them along to colleagues. I can definitely see the benefits and difficulties for integrating multimedia into an institution that is not prepared for the ed-tech culture but I strongly feel such integration is worth the struggle. I would not teach a class without multimedia because I believe its inclusion provides learning opportunities for students who would otherwise not benefit from the lesson. Isn’t that what it’s all about?

References

Bates, A.W., & Poole, G. (2003). Effective teaching with technology in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Siemens, G. (2003). Evaluating Media Characteristics: Using multimedia to achieve learning outcomes. Elearnspace. Accessed Online 19, July, 2009, from http://www.elarnspace.org/Articles/mediacharacteristics.htm

The framework of “Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education” by Chickering & Gamson (1987) and Chickering & Ehrmann’s (1996) “Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as a Lever” are written in a “common sense” style which camouflages the complex pedagogical principles and effective classroom management skills required to conduct “good practice” in an academic setting of any level. Bates and Poole (2003) read more academic, but the SECTIONS framework is deceivingly simple sounding. I found myself nodding my head in agreement with SECTIONS and the Seven Principles (1987, 1996) based on my personal experience. However, “Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as a Lever” (1996) now seems slightly dated when one reads the examples of technology use, but the principles hold.

Chickering & Ehrmann’s (1996) 3rd principle of Good Practices Uses Active Learning Techniques and Bates & Poole’s (2003) T:Teaching and Learning resonated with me as being complementary and meaningful. I’m an ESL elementary teacher and I apply the SECTIONS “T” : Identifying what kind of learning to facilitate and make meaningful to meet my students’ diverse needs is a key reason I select learning technologies. I feel this technique is complemented by Chickering & Ehrmann’s (1996) 3^rd principle because a thoughtful identification of technology should enhance and support active learning and result in the selection of active learning technologies. For example, an English language wiki project is selected over MS Power Point to encourage ESL students to collaborate using English. I have identified the skill of collaboration using English and I’ve selected an application that requires students to construct knowledge actively.

To keep my post reasonable length, I will briefly state that SECTIONS’ Costs and Ease of Use & Reliability are two areas of ed-tech I feel very strongly about. The principle of prompt feedback is another. I look forward to discussing these with others. Erin

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.

For more information on Bate’s publications, visit his site! http://www.tonybates.ca/tag/poole/

Chickering, A.W. and Gamson, Z.F. (1987).  Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education.  American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 39 (7), p. 3-7.
http://www.aahea.org/bulletins/articles/sevenprinciples1987.htm
Chickering, A.W. and Ehrmann, S.C. (1996).  “Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as Lever,” American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 49(2), p. 3-6.
http://www.aahea.org/bulletins/articles/sevenprinciples.htm
 

Module one introduced me to methods of selecting and using learning technologies based on theoretical frameworks. This is my reflection after posting and discussing the issues with colleagues.

In ETEC 510 I was introduced to the work of Bates and Poole’s  (2003) A Framework for Selecting and Using Technology. In this module for ETEC 565, I returned to Bates and Poole’s framework with five MET courses between my first reading of it ( in January of 2008) and now. My ideas on how to implement SECTIONS have changed dramatically. I realize the importance of considering all aspects of SECTIONS from perspectives beyond that of a classroom teacher. The discussion in 565 reminded me that Cost is, usually, the deciding factor when selecting technology. As much as our 565 discussion applauded the value of Ease of Use, Students and Teaching and Learning, personal experience from colleagues centered on Cost.

This module introduced me to the work of Chickering and Gamson (1987) and of Chickering and Ehrmann (1996). Chickering & Gamson’s (1987) Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education are principles I have seen in great classrooms. Personally, I am a teacher who gives prompt feedback because students are motivated and focused on how to improve their work before it is due. I am also a teacher who considers time on task as essential and I provide time for students to focus on tasks. Chickering & Gamson’s (1987) principle of using active learning techniques has worked for me as both a teacher and a student. When I engage myself in a learning activity, I gain a greater deal of knowledge then if I simply use rote memorization techniques. From my own learning experience, I teach using methods that actively engage students. This point brings me to Chickering & Ehrmann’s (1996) Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as Lever. The authors discuss the original seven principles in relation to technology available in the late ’90s.  Active learning techniques, prompt feedback and time on task are principles that can be met more easily by technology: open-source software and social networking tools alone can motivate learners and teachers to use these principles at a framework for structuring lessons and selecting technology.

For a better idea of Bates and Poole’s (2003) holistic view on teaching with technology, I suggest their website: http://www.batesandpoole.ubc.ca/index.html where you can view the theoretical foundation of their work in the Resources tab or by clicking on this link: http://www.batesandpoole.ubc.ca/pdf/OPAS.pdf. To see an instructor’s suggestions for implementing the Seven Principles from the classroom perspective of 2008, follow the series of posts titled “Implementing the Seven Principles” here: http://georgeself.wordpress.com/2008/02/08/principle-one/. You can select which principle to focus on, they are organized by number.

References

Bates, A., & Pooles, G. (2003). A framework for selecting and using technology. In Effective Teaching with Technology (pp. 75-105).

Chickering, A. W. and Gamson, Z.F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 39 (7), 3-7. Retrieved May 5, 2009,  from http://www.aahea.org/bulletins/articles/sevenprinciples1987.htm

Chickering, A. W. and Ehrmann, S. C. (1996). Implementing the seven principles: Technolgy as lever. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 49 (2), 3-6. Retrieved May 5, 2009, from http://www.aahea.org/bulletins/articles/sevenprinciples.htm