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
LMS Reflection: Moodle Splash Page and Object Orientation
Moodle has been a sharp learning curve. I am especially grateful for the online community and the MET community which offers support and tips. I realized through a MET colleague that my Splash page was not exactly a Splash page. I thought a Splash page was a welcome page, having never designed an LMS course before. Although I had great feedback in MET forums considering what it should be, I didn’t imagine it correctly until I saw the Splash page of another MET member. Thanks Sean!
I quickly learned to edit Topic 0, decide on the main components of my course, upload images, insert a table and create a Splash page that welcomed students. The most difficult part was imagining which aspects of the course should be on the page. I decided to base my objects on my previous MET experience. My experience helped me decide which objects are essential on a Splash page and which are just taking up precious space. It is important to maintain the “less is more” principle with a new course. Too much information and too many links may frustrate and confuse students. I tried to avoid that by creating a “welcome” message, which is listed after the Splash.
It took a great deal of time to consider how the course will be organized and how the objects will be used in the different modules. The mechanics of uploading the images and creating the links was not difficult, and took about one hour. I used images available from the open source site Wikimedia Commons. I considered my Splash page from the perspective of a student creating a first impression of the course. The SECTIONS model guided my decisions, and “ease of use” is currently my first priority. As I progress with my LMS, “teaching and learning” will guide my design decisions.
For members of the MET community, my Moodle (work in progress) can be found below. Please provide any feedback on my Splash page and feel free to ask me questions. You must login with your own Moodle account information as my LMS is not set for guest access.
http://moodle.met.ubc.ca/course/category.php?id=5
Project Objectives
· Goal: initiate e-learning program in upper elementary (grades 4-6; population=45) by developing functioning blended delivery classroom opportunities through use of the open source Moodle learning management system (LMS) within two years.
· Objectives within goal: overall pedagogical gains for the English language learning (ELL) program due to increased exposure to English use. This may attract new students and increase student enrolment levels resulting in capital gain within five years.
· Strategy: Develop sustainable blended learning delivery opportunities (face to face with e-learning) through an open source learning management system (LMS).
Moodle is an open source LMS, software used to plan, deliver, and manage learning in a school, which includes an online virtual classroom and courses led by the instructor (Learning management, n.d.; Moodle, n.d.). To projectobjectives, it is proposed that Moodle be installed as the schools LMS. Current instructional technology (IT) support staff can liaise with teachers to ensure enrolment procedures and space allocations are functional. IT must transfer current class website data and student/teacher information to Moodle. Initial professional development must focus on IT training and teacher training. A project management approach is suggested to decide on key areas of investment, resource allocation, identify existing technology support and to ensure the focus remains the English learning environment (Bates, 2000).
Selection of Moodle
Traditionally licensed LMS systems can be extremely costly, with WebCT costing into the hundreds of thousands (Wagstaff, 2009). Thegoal is not focused on economic gain, and our school would not see a return on investment if a licensed LMS was purchased. Cost, Teaching and Learning and Ease of Use are three major areas of Bates & Poole’s (2003) SECTIONS model that support a decision to implement Moodle. Moodle is open source under the GNU Public licensing, meaning it is free to use, adapt and modify to suit our needs (Moodle License, n.d). I explored a demo Moodle and found its interface and icons very novice/ELL friendly.
The open source LMSof Moodle, Clairoline and Sakaiwere compared using Edutools, The Business Readiness Rating™ (although still in its request for comments stage) and a needs-based rubric (Bronk, Del Mundo, Gillespie, Jung & Wood., 2009; Ronsen, n.d.). The key elements analysed include student record management, tools for assessment, communications tools, costs, system requirements, ease of use, security and constructive teaching/learning opportunities. Moodle most clearly suited the needs of this project by having the strongest security, online support systems and communities, a variety of tools suitable for beginners and a user-friendly intuitive interface.
Intended Outcomes
The intended outcomes are based on Bates & Poole’s (2003) SECTIONS model and implications of Chickering & Ehrmann’s (1996) principles of good teaching practices in undergraduate education. In addition, the International Baccalaureate’s Primary Years Program (2009) curriculum is considered. It is proposed that within 1-2 years of Moodle adoption:
1. Teachers will teach English material using a constructivist approach and gain technological skills to meet the needs of the Tapscott’s (2004) Net Generation. Teachers do not become novices online but they need time to adapt to technology supported learning (Kelly, 2007).
2. English language learners will engage in inquiry-based learning opportunities in a meaningful way and gain technological skills that can transfer to areas outside of the classroom. (International Bacclaureate, 2002).
3. The school will offer varied learning opportunities for students while fostering a sense of community. The school will remain competitive in the private elementary sector through the use of innovative and modern approaches to educational technology and ELL.
4. Technical requirements and training will be sustainable for three to five years. Moodle will be implemented in grades 4, 5 and 6 and will be sustained through staff training, current levels of IT staffing and the creation of a Moodle fund.
5. The creation of a modest LMS fund to secure the sustainability of Moodle for 3-5 years.
Rationale
The timeline is supported by Bates (2000) project management approach directed for long term technological change. Objectives 1-3are supported by research on English language learning and technology integration. Social software, like wikis available through Moodle,enable students to generate knowledge in a shared and openly collaborative space (Wheeler, Yeomans & Wheeler, 2008). Wu (2005; 2006) and Cummings (2004) argue English language students benefit from the innovative incorporation of technology in the classroom. It has been argued that the artificial constructs of interaction in an LMS limit discovery and constructivist learning (Siemens, 2004). However, Moodlesupports constructivist modular growth through its various applications (Chavan & Pavri,2004).
Objectives four and five require minimum technical requirements at start-up. Moodle can run on the school’s server due to its Linux/Apache/MySQL/PHP platform (Chavan & Pavri, 2004). Hardware includes approximately 400 MB-1GB of free disc space for installation and course materials, which is currently available. It is requested that the school consider the purchase of a back-up server as teachers develop more content. This would cost approximately $1200-$2000 (CDN) from licensed suppliers. NetSpot is a Moodle Partner in Hong Kong for outsourced support. Sustainability may require contracting NetSpot in the future if student numbers increase. Considering IT support, in-house staff training and server maintenance, a budget of approximately $5,000 (CDN) is requested for the first year of development.
References
Bates, T. (2000). Managing technological change: Strategies for college and university leaders. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
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.
Bronk, R., Del Mundo, M., Gillespie, E., Jung, C., & S., Wood, (2009). Delivery platform evaluation rubric.
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 May 10, 2009, from http://www.aahea.org/bulletins/articles/sevenprinciples.htm
Chavan, A., & Pavri, S. (2004). Open source learning management with moodle. Linux Journal. Retrieved June 3, 2009, from http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7478
Cummings, M. C. (2004). “Because we are shy and fear mistaking”: Computer mediated communication with EFL writers. Journal of Basic Writing, 23(2), 23-43. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ684124).
EduTools. Product comparison. Available May 25, 2009, from http://www.edutools.info/compare.jsp?pj=4&i=599,560,616
International Baccalaureate. (2009). Who we are. Retrieved May 20, 2009, from http://www.ibo.org/general/who.cfm
International Baccalaureate Organization. (2002). A basis for practice: the primary years programme. Retrieved May 20, 2009 from http://www.ibo.org/pyp/documents/basis_pyp_000.pdf
Kelly, O. (2007). Moving to blended delivery in a polytechnic: Shifting the mindset of faculty and institutions. In M. Bullen and D.P. Janes (Eds.), Making the Transition to E-Learning: Strategies and Issues (pp. 33-46). Hershey: Information Science Publishing.
Learning Management System. Wikipedia. Available on June 3, 2009, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_management_system
Moodle About (n.d.). What is moodle? Retrieved June 2, 2009, from http://moodle.org/about/
Moodle License (n.d.). Copyright license for moodle. Retrieved June 3, 2009, from http://docs.moodle.org/en/License
Ronson, Z. (n.d.). Digging into openbrr of moodle and sakai. Retrieved June 6, 2009, from http://www.zacker.org/sakai-project-vs-moodle
Siemens, G. (2004). Learning management systems: The wrong place to start learning. Retrieved June 3, 2009, from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/lms.htm
The Business Readiness Reading (n.d.). Retrieved June 2, 2009, from http://www.openbrr.org/wiki/index.php/Home
Wagstaff, C. (2009). WebCT software rising in cost. The Loquitur: Cabrini College. Retrieved May 17, 2009, from http://media.www.theloquitur.com/media/storage/paper226/news/2002/04/11/News/Webct.Software.Rising.In.Cost-233894.shtml
Wheeler, S., Yeomans, P., & Wheeler, D. (2008). The good, the bad and the wiki: Evaluating
student-generated content for collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology. 39 (6), 987-995. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00799.x
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
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 from http://www.chu.edu.tw/~wswu/publications/papers/journals/04.pdf
Bates,
Moodle Reflection:
Well, during the first week of Module 2, I have learned a great deal about LMS! I had never even heard of Claroline, and my WebCT knowledge was limited to my adventures in MET. Moodle, although I have heard of it, is an LMS I have only worked with once before, in ETEC 512. I completed a group assignment using Moodle, but I must admit that I had no idea how to manage Moodle! I would e-mail my work as an attachment to group members and they would upload it to Moodle.
Now, consider this week: Choose your own LMS space and complete the Activities
Initially, I felt very concerned and, I admit, a little scared. I e-mail John Egan three times trying to clear up the Vista/Moodle decision. I quickly learned we just had to use ONE (whew!) and that a password would be sent to me shortly. After I received my password, I followed the Moodle activity in the 565 toolkit and was on my way.
The activity was nicely described. It was worded clearly, and I could follow the instructions well. I only had to skip one step, and that was a section on grading responses/replies to the discussion posts. I couldn’t select that option because the Moodle did not open the option for me. Oh well. Generally speaking, I feel more confident that I can complete the Moodle assignment because my first Moodle attempt went very well. I felt great when I completed the tasks. I also noted the “extra help” links and I’ve used some already. Between completing the activity and visiting help sites online, I think I’ve spent about 5 or 6 hours this week learning about Moodle. I have so much more to learn!!!!
By the way, I came across a great resource for beginners like myself. A teacher has posted 2-minute moodle instructions for other teachers. You can visit it here: http://human.edublogs.org/moodle-tutorials-2-minute-moodles/ It helped me get a better understanding of the “overall” Moodle design. Erin
