community of practice – Kenneth Buis ePortfolio

Sections Model

S – Students: What is known about the students – or potential students – and the appropriateness of the technology for this particular group or range of students?

E – Ease of use and reliability: how easy is it for both teachers and students to use? How reliable and well tested is the technology?

C – Costs: what is the cost structure of each technology? What is the unit cost per learner?

T – Teaching and learning: what kinds of learning are needed? What instructional approaches will best meet these needs? What are the best technologies for supporting this teaching and learning?

I – Interactivity: what kind of interaction does this technology enable?

O – Organizational issues: What are the organizational requirements and the barriers to be removed before this technology can be used successfully? What changes in organization need to be made?

N – Novelty: how new is this technology?

S – Speed: how quickly can courses be mounted with this technology? How quickly can materials be changed? (Bates and Poole, 2003)

For the last 17 years I have taught, developed and adapted technology to computer courses. I have also been a technology coordinator for much of that time as well. As a result I have had to consider the implications of choosing technology carefully over the years while also being able to adapt to shrinking school board budgets and the politics of Dromology.

The two must striking elements of the Bates and Poole model that I have faced over the years have to be Costs and Organizational issues.

Costs are always an issue when it comes to implementing new technology. Governments develop curriculum requirements and suggested tools and strategies, and then, at least in the public system, they systematically strip away funding. Programs that suffer the most seem to be the arts, music and technology, since they are the hardest to standardize and often the most difficult to quantify. Being able to keep labs of computers up-to-date as well as providing software that fits the requirements course work and prepares students well for their future endeavours is key to my teaching practices. Another aspect around cost is the fact that decision makers no very little about technology and implementing new educational directions, and are often unwilling to learn, and make their financial decisions based on dated knowledge of education and technology.

This ties in directly with Organizational issues. If a school system is to provide innovative teaching and learning opportunities for students and teachers, it needs to be properly organized to implement funding for technology that solves the issues and needs at hand, instead of political issues. For example, in the Vancouver School Board, Desire to Learn was implemented at a great cost, rather than using Moodle. The Adult Ed. Section was not allowed to use it, so we developed Moodle for free instead and it has had a greater, lasting effect on the delivery of course material and mixed-mode learning than could have been possible with Desire to Learn. This is one of many examples of the troubles of bureaucracy. The new model in business is to involve all elements of an organization in the decision-making process, and to open up opportunities for all levels.

Another aspect of Organizational Issues is Dromology and the politics of CHANGE. Innovative use of technology can be politically charged as teachers work either together or individually to implement change and deliver a different educational product via new technology. Norway, for example, has required that all students attain a high level of technological ability before they graduate. Schools have begun moving towards a model of a learning organization, where teachers and students learn new technology and adapt to it continually. Bureaucracy and organizational issues are definitely a problem regarding Dromology, the politics of change and implementing new technology.

If you are interested in Dromology, please see: http://www.ferviddesigns.com/kenbuis/dromology-and-ocularcentrism/

Bates & Poole. (2003). “A Framework for Selecting and Using Technology.” In Effective Teaching with Technology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Digital Age Teaching

I teach digital media arts and work tirelessly to inspire student creativity by building in artistic inspiration at all levels of the course, while also exploring the creative process and working with creative flow. To prevent a Fordist approach to producing digital works, whether they be digital art, websites, animations or video, my students work individually and in groups or as a class to work through an inspiration and give it life through gradual and complementary development. We study the paintings of the Masters through the ages to learn about colour and light, study and explore photography, follow and learn from graphic design and website design trends and take time to truly appreciate digital media as an art form. Through our class blog we work together to share our experiences and development as digital media artists.

All of my courses are developed with a digital-age learning experience and assessment in mind. I have been using Moodle in my classes for 8+ years and implement it in a blended mode model of learning. Skill-building workshops are presented each class to develop various skills and artistry, and are posted on a calendar I designed in PHP. Assessment is based on a combination of real-world market value, originality and creative approaches, growth of technological skill and artistic insight and through the production of work based on real-world design issues. Further insight into work is given space on our class blog.

I model digital age work and learning, since I am also a website designer, graphic artist and photographer, SEO and internet marketing professional as well as a web-entrepreneur. Since I know how I have built and designed my own products, I share some of them with students for insight into the business and art of digital media, as well as experiences of working with a very diverse group of business people from all over the world. In order to teach blogging and digital citizenship I write up sample blogs on our class blog (some of which were published through larger organizations—exciting!) and assist students in developing their online digital voice. Hence they learn to not only consume, but also to produce knowledge. We use Twitter and Tumblr and learn to work within the confines of the fluid space of flows of cyberspace. The class also works very hard to maintain originality and respect the copyright of work online. I have done workshops, pro-d presentations and community training over the years and continue to do so. The entire focus of my work is to inspire and enable the inner artist in every student and teacher I work with, and my excitement at working with that interior artist is infectious. In my side businesses I teach social media, marketing, digital identity and branding as well as a model for just-in-time learning (which never ends, but is based on current needs of a project, client or business). Everything I teach is no older than 8 months, so it is completely current and still in the innovation mode. While this is challenging to keep up with, my students leave with a foundation of cutting-edge skills.

In ETEC 565 I would like to continue to develop my skills in building communities of practice, start looking more deeply into mobile learning solutions and experiment with solid online communication tools and educational crowdsourcing.

Every course I have taken in MET has enriched all aspects of my teaching practice, as well as my own personal insights and philosophies into the networked society, dromology and art. I look forward to the challenge and enlightenment of learning and utilizing more, guided by the rich insights and experiences of our class CoP. At some point, I would also like to begin working on a project that enables a global, integrated learning platform for secondary school, similar to our MET experience, but based on project production.