Erin’s Educational Technology Journey

This is a posting reflecting on the activities in module 3, unit 2. I had to explore Moodle communication tools and decide which tools to add to my course. This is not part of my “official” assignment on selecting tools, but this activity prepared me for it. I am looking forward to any feedback before I submit my official “case”. Feel free to comment. I will reflect on this activity at the end of module 3 to show how much I’ve learned!

Setting: Grade 4 blended learning environment with English Language Learners (70%) and native English speakers (30%) were class population=15.  Moodle has been chosen to provide all students with educational technology experience, to enhance the existing learning program and to provide ELL students with more opportunities to practice English communication skills. Science classes will be taught in a blended-learning format.

Communication Tools

Asynchronous 2-way communication: Moodle blog & discussion forum

Synchronous 2-way communication: Moodle chat function

Activity

I created a science unit on dinosaurs based in Moodle and this will be the first time students will use Moodle. In a blended-delivery course, it is possible to lecture about the learning management system, but a class is necessary to explore and orient to the Moodle environment. The instructional goal in this activity is to provide an orientation of the Moodle space, begin to foster an online learning community and to familiarize students with use of the dinosaur unit Splash Page navigation. For the purposes of this posting, I will focus on the rationale of the communication tools.

A “Start Here” activity in the Introductory Module was created. Through the activity, students learn that the class will be using various communication tools during future group and individual work. The activity is designed to give students experience using the tools in to maximize time-on-task during future modules.

Discussion Forum: Students write a brief introduction and answer basic questions about dinosaurs and the unit. I created an introduction about myself to promote the principle of faculty-student contact and a sense of trust and safety (Anderson, 2008; Chickering & Ehrmann, 1996). In addition, this sets a personalized tone for the course and gives students the opportunity to see my own interest in dinosaurs (Anderson, 2008). I wanted to ensure the course began by providing a “social presence” opportunity so students would feel supported and open to sharing ideas as they develop a collaborative community (Anderson, 2008). The student introduction activity was selected based on the principle of fostering reciprocity and cooperation among students (Chickering & Ehrmann, 1996). In addition, discussions are an active learning technique that engage students and stimulate constructive learning (Chickering & Ehrmann, 1996). Being asynchronous, the discussion forum provides ELL students time to formulate ideas and structure their arguments. To track posts, I can use the “reports” section or the “activity reports” section to see who has been active in posting. I’m learning about this, as it is not fool-proof and there are work-arounds to track quality posts requiring more time (See “Track student forum participation” in the Using Moodle forum at http://moodle.org/course/view.php?id=5). My concern is some students may “lurk” and participate infrequently in the longer term. Also, some students may dominate the future discussions. I tried to initiate discussions in the introduction to model the importance of everyone participating.

 A final note: In the future I want to develop student-led discussions and I thought initial discussions should be modeled (See Anderson, 2008, p.351).

Chat Forum: Students are instructed to introduce themselves and to respond to the chat introductions of others. Again, this supports the principles of student-faculty contact and student-student cooperation and functions as an active learning technique (Chickering & Ehrmann, 1996). This also supports a social presence, the establishment of trust and (in the future) engagement with cognitive presence (Anderson, 2008). Synchronous text communication may be more challenging for ELL students but I want to provide them with the opportunity to practice and improve their skills. I included the message that spelling and grammar were not concerns in chat to ease anxieties. Of course, beyond language anxieties, my concern is also time-on-task. Chat is used in this activity to aid orientation but keeping students on-task in chat may prove to be difficult or challenging. To track chats, I know I can go to the “participants” link and see which chats each students has been engaged in.

Moodle Blog: Students are instructed to reflect on their introductory module and to set their privacy settings to “members of this class”. As Anderson (2008) notes, blog discourse renewed reflective writing .  As an active learning technique, this tool requires students to reflect and engage in the material (Chickering & Ehrmann, 1996). As an asynchronous tool, it supports the principle of respecting diverse talents and ways of learning because it is the student’s personal reflective space (Chickering & Ehrmann, 1996). They can add to it as they wish in addition to posting required content. All students can take their time to formulate ideas and structure their own understanding through self-reflection. In addition, the comment feature allows for asynchronous exchange and peer feedback. Survey research on ELL students and blogging by Wu (2005; 2006) found ELL students felt more motivated and confident writing in English when blogging was added to their face-to-face English writing class. My biggest concern is privacy, and I’ve selected the “make my blog visible to classmates only” in my design. In addition, as a teacher I want to facilitate blogging through peer-feedback (comments) but some students may not respond well or want to comment on the blogs of others. As an instructor, I plan on commenting on blogs and tracking blog posts through the “participants” tab.

The introductory module does instruct students to visit the class wiki for orientation, but students are not instructed to post. This will be a follow-up activity in Module 1.

Does anyone have any better Moodle ideas/tips for tracking discussions/chats/blog posts within a class Moodle? I searched the Moodle forums and some of the “tech talk” was beyond me. Any tips or work-arounds to suggest?

References

Anderson, T. (2008). Teaching in an Online Learning Content. In: Anderson, T. & Elloumi, F. Theory and Practice of Online Learning. Athabasca University. Accessed online June 14, 2009, from http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/14_Anderson_2008_Anderson-DeliveryQualitySupport.pdf

Chickering, A.W., & Ehrmann, S.C. (1996). Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever. Retrieved May 6, 2009,f rom http://www.aahea.org/bulletins/articles/sevenprinciples.htm

Moodle. Using moodle forum. Available on June 15, 2009, from http://moodle.org/course/view.php?id=5

Wu, W. S. (2005). Using blogs in an EFL writing class. Proceedings of 2005 International   Conference and Workshop on TEFL & Applied Linguistics, Taiwan, 426-432. Retrieved              May 18, 2009 from http://www.chu.edu.tw/~wswu/publications/papers/conferences/05.pdf

Wu, W. S. (2006). The effect of blog peer review and teacher feedback on the revisions of EFL   writers. Journal of Education and Foreign Languages and Literature, 3, 125-139.     Retrieved May 18, 2009 from http://www.chu.edu.tw/~wswu/publications/ papers/journals/04.pdf

I believe Lenora should use an open source wiki (or blog, Google sites) instead of a website. It is noted that Lenora’s members would have to create an account (in the case of pbworks or Google sites) which may be considered a hurdle by some. I chose to apply the SECTIONS frame work because Lenora has to select and use technology with the purpose of creating and maintaining a community for knowledge building. I think it would take her a few evenings of researching the best OS for her needs, and a few evenings setting up her wiki. She could be up-and-running in one week. My reasoning is as follows:

Students: In the future, the technology may have to be appropriate for students to find resources on bullying. Currently the concern is for other teachers. In this scenario the technology must be appropriate for novices because Lenora does not know the tech-comfort level of those who will attend her pro-d online day. A website or a wiki would be fine because both can be designed for novices. However, a wiki does have the advantage of WYSIWYG and Lenora does not know how to design a website. Decision: Wiki

Ease of Use: Will this technology be reliable. Teachers are depending on this as a learning tool and as a resource. Teachers have limited time for professional development and tech frustrations should be kept to a minimum. A website and a wiki are reliable. However, Lenora is a teacher with limited time and she will be a user of this technology. Decision: Wiki

Costs: Lenora does not have a departmental budget and will handle costs on her own. Assuming her school does not allow her to create a pro-d website using their server; she would have to pay for hosting. Decision: Wiki

Teaching and learning: The kind of learning will be collaborative. Knowledge will be shared and constructed. Instructional approaches will be discussions and feedback, and text-based information is suitable. The best technology would support asynchronous communication because teachers will have different time schedules. A website, if created by a novice, may be Web 1.0 styled. Decision: Wiki, with 2.0 WYSIWYG applications

Interactivity: The interaction required is shared communication. E-mail is not required, but the option would be nice for professionals to stay in touch. The ability to post discussions is required and members could post their addresses in forums. This would be difficult for Lenora to create in a website at her level. Decision: Wiki with 2.0 WYSIWYG applications.

Organizational issues: Lenora needs something she can do easily, by herself and something she won’t need considerable IT support for. Lenora does need a place (online) to go for help because she has limited skills. Decision: Wiki, with help links and forums available 24-7.

Novelty:Lenora needs a technology that is established and has been used to create a community of learning before. She is not a pioneer and she should use an application/site that has satisfied professionals who prioritize collaboration and communication exchange. In addition, a low novelty effect will be less likely to “scare” off the technophobes and novices in her community. Decision: A little research online would lead Lenora, at this point, to Google sites, pbworks, wordpress, edublogger…etc. She could research and decide which application is better suited for beginners.

Speed: Lenora needs to consider how quickly her work can reach others and how quickly they can respond to construct solutions to bullying in the community. This is directly affected by Lenora’s dial-up status. Decision: Keep it simple! Lenora does not need Flash animation, images or fancy banners. Simple text-based asynchronous communication would load with limited frustration. Lenora could prepare text in a word processing program and cut-and-paste into her posts/pages.  This would save her the time of attaching/downloading files.

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