{"id":51,"date":"2010-12-01T14:21:28","date_gmt":"2010-12-01T09:21:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/ktharris\/"},"modified":"2010-12-06T12:40:15","modified_gmt":"2010-12-06T07:40:15","slug":"lms-synthesis","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/ktharris\/lms-synthesis\/","title":{"rendered":"Synthesis"},"content":{"rendered":"

ETEC 565 Synthesis<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/em>This is my fifth course in the MET program. \u00a0The successful completion of this course will mark the halfway point of my experience in learning about educational technology. I have found this course to be a culmination of the previous four courses; somewhat of a halfway-summation of the previous year. \u00a0As I worked through constructing my LMS (using Moodle), as well as completing ETEC 511, I referred often to the application of the knowledge from 511 in the creation of the LMS. \u00a0In this way, 565 has felt like a synthesis of the thus far completed courses, as well as a reference point for future courses. \u00a0Throughout each course I complete in the program, I keep a collection of documents, clips, and quotes from my colleagues, the instructor, and the readings; these serve for me as a reference and reminded of the striking content from the course that I would like to carry forward in my every day work and ongoing development.<\/p>\n

Pr\u00e9cis of the Flight Path<\/strong><\/p>\n

The flight path activity acted as a preflection of the material that was to be covered based on the course outline. \u00a0It gave us an opportunity to first consider the modules of the course and activate our prior knowledge and contextualize the topics within our individual contexts. \u00a0When I re-read my flight plan, I recall my focus on access for low-bandwidth areas and non-computer users. \u00a0My intention was initially to design an online workshop where the participants from Africa or South America could complete the activities. \u00a0It seems that my goal changed as I actually build the site and began to focus on a learning opportunity for the trainers<\/em> of those participants (mostly North American facilitators) and enhancing their abilities so that they can serve the local populations. \u00a0Another interesting comment from my flight plan is that I was unsure of how adult learning (constructivism) is paired with online learning (removing the interactions of F2F). \u00a0After having completed another course with MET, I am beginning to understand that paradigm shift that is not only required in the instruction, but also in how participants perceive the communication. \u00a0Often there are examples of an instructor using eLearning by posting lecture slides or recordings online– this is not eLearning. \u00a0This is simply posting information online. \u00a0Instructing in an eLearning context, we need to be prepared to adjust our approach. \u00a0Similarly, we need to help the participants (perhaps through simple statement) understand that while this is still communication, it is a different medium that should be approached as such.<\/p>\n

My goal leading into this course was to create an environment for collaboration and sharing for the participants. \u00a0I believe that as I discovered the capabilities of the tools (forums, wikis, chats, etc.), I found that there was an opportunity for guidance and injects into the collaborative process. \u00a0This allows the eInstructor to encourage participants to consider best practices. \u00a0I am pleased with the product that has resulted from this journey, even if it is not the same goal as I set out at the beginning of the assignment. \u00a0From this exercise, I am taking forward with me carefully building my goals as to not predict (or constrain) the outcomes, limiting the potential for the journey.<\/p>\n

Reflection on <\/strong>eLearning Toolkit<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

My experience with the eLearning Toolkit is similar to my experiences with technology in the classroom: it is a tool, but does not replace the instructor or learner. \u00a0I found the eLearning Toolkit to be incredibly helpful as a resource when I was stumped with a challenge, but browsing the tools was daunting. \u00a0It is so well connected that I found myself in a facebook-like situation: I start with a piece of information that I am seeking (an instruction, a fact, a hint, etc.), and end up pages and pages away from my intended goal, that is near impossible to get back through without some breadcrumb navigation. \u00a0This can be a little bit challenging when looking for a specific piece of information.<\/p>\n

On there internet there are so many option for answers. \u00a0It can be very difficult to find a quality response. \u00a0With the eLearning toolkit, there were quality answers that were accessible without the same requirement to google each individually and assess their validity (which is considerably easier with the new google that allows the user to preview pages in a thumbnail-like format).<\/p>\n

All considered, the eLearning Toolkit is an excellent resource for learning about eLearning. \u00a0It is well referenced and complete. \u00a0As a student I did have some hesitation edit it, but understand that that is the collaborative nature of such a wiki.<\/p>\n

Reflection on ETEC 565<\/strong><\/p>\n

As mentioned earlier, I keep a running document of clips, quotes, documents, texts from the course. \u00a0This document helps me to compile and reflect on the materials so that I am able to refer back to the concepts and use<\/em> them in the future. \u00a0The following are a summary of the aspects of this course that will stick with me as I continue to develop as an educator.<\/p>\n

Bates and Poole’s SECTIONS model (based on the initial ACTIONS model) simplified the selection of educational technologies and helped me to defend my choices in eLearning in a systematic approach. \u00a0By carefully considering each of the aspects listed, there is a clear rationale for decisions. \u00a0I respect the choice to begin by considering the students, the ease of use (the two most important by far), followed closely by the reality of the costs. \u00a0This model is simple, clear, and helpful.<\/p>\n

In working with the National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers, there were two standards that stood out for me:<\/p>\n

1d. Teachers model collaborative knowledge construction by engaging in learning with students, colleagues, and others in face-to-face and virtual environments.<\/p>\n

4b. Teachers address the diverse needs of all learners by using learner-centered strategies providing equitable access to appropriate digital tools and resources.<\/p>\n

Both of these resonated with me and helped me to define my personal beliefs about educational technology as they focus on collaboration and diversity. \u00a0By marrying collaboration with diversity (challenging, but the rewards have the potential to be amazing), there is a heightened sense of engagement and creativity as there are so many perspectives to be considered. \u00a0Both of these (with minor modifications) have become part of my personal educational philosophy.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>This diagram (right) from Anderson’s Towards a Theory of Online Learning<\/em> also resonated with me. \u00a0It clearly highlights that interactions between learner, teacher, and content in a way that was foreign to me (I had never considered the content as a player). \u00a0This makes that content almost like a type of instructor on its own as not all interactions are seen to be between the learner and the teacher. \u00a0This reminded me quite a bit of self-directed online learning as there is a diminished role of the teacher (which is beneficial in many ways including time resources, budget, access, etc.).<\/p>\n

The section of the course on synchronous\/asynchronous communication also served to highlight and classify communication in a way that I had previously not considered. \u00a0The charts in the course materials highlighting the different activities, what type they each are, and the positives\/challenges of each are excellent for planning a balanced online program that meets the needs of all learners.<\/p>\n

In assessment, the importance of feedback was highlighted for adult learners. \u00a0I very much enjoyed applying the concepts in Gibbs and Simpson’s Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning<\/em> invoked. \u00a0I have shared this article with a number of colleagues as I really enjoyed the perspectives on assessment as a tool for adult learners. \u00a0Assessment in adult learning is very difficult as it focuses on feedback and ongoing (formative) assessments that are intended to focus the participants’ path; this is always challenging when adult learning is based on the notion that we are each the experts of our personal contexts. \u00a0How can someone assess my ability to do my job, in my role in the team, in my specific context? \u00a0As an adult learner, it can be difficult to take part in assessment as it changes the motivation from internal to external.<\/p>\n

Finally, a concept that struck me was the concept of web 2.0. \u00a0I was unfamiliar with the Web 2.0 before beginning this course (although I use many of the features of this toolset, including Levine’s 50 tools<\/a>). \u00a0Again, the categorization and clear distinction help me to recognize similarities and use the tools more effectively. \u00a0The poignant video A Vision of Students Today<\/a><\/em> as an example of the Web 2.0 tools (self publishing) also resonated as I myself was in third year when this video was created (and absolutely identify with the students in the video, even though at this point even they are out of date).<\/p>\n

Next Steps<\/strong><\/p>\n

The next steps for me as a learner in the field of educational technology are to continue with the MET program. \u00a0This will be different going forward from ETEC 565 as at this point I have had the opportunity to ground the theory in practice with my design of a Moodle site. \u00a0Often times in a longer course at my place of work, we ask participants to take part in a number of scenarios and activities that are outside of the classroom activities, but related; this is so that they have a shared set of experiences to refer back to and build on. \u00a0Having worked through the creation of a Moodle site, I have a set of experiences in which I can refer back to and refine (and even share with my classmates).<\/p>\n

Outside of the MET program, I am looking forward to building tools for use in my current position as a Learning Design Officer at the Pearson Peacekeeping Centre. \u00a0I have been discussing a number of proposals with my current supervisor to begin exploring opportunities that can be accessed abroad.<\/p>\n

Personally, I am very interested in exploring the motivation of eLearners. \u00a0I, as an online learner, find that my motivation is very different from when learning F2F. \u00a0I would like to learn more about how motivation of F2F and eLearners differ.<\/p>\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n

Alexander, B. (2006) Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning? EDUCAUSE Review, 41(2), 34-44.\u00a0 Accessed online. http:\/\/www.educause.edu\/ir\/library\/pdf\/ERM0621.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n

Anderson, T. (2008). Towards a Theory of Online Learning.\u00a0 In: Anderson, T. & Elloumi, F. Theory and Practice of Online Learning. Athabasca University. Accessed online http:\/\/www.aupress.ca\/books\/120146\/ebook\/02_Anderson_2008_Anderson-Online_Learning.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

Gibbs, G. and Simpson, C. (2005).\u00a0 \u201cConditions under which assessment supports students\u2019 learning.\u201d Learning and Teaching in Higher Education Accessed online http:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/fast\/pdfs\/Gibbs%20and%20Simpson%202004-05.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n

Levine, A.\u00a0 (2007). \u201c50 Web 2.0 Ways to Tell a Story.\u201d\u00a0 Accessed online. http:\/\/cogdogroo.wikispaces.com\/StoryTools<\/a><\/p>\n

National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers\u2028http:\/\/www.iste.org\/Content\/NavigationMenu\/NETS\/ForTeachers\/2008Standards\/NETS_for_Teachers_2008.htm<\/a><\/p>\n

Wesch, M. (2007). Web 2.0. The Machine is Us\/ing Us: Web 2.0 in just under 5 minutes.\u00a0 Accessed online. https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=NLlGopyXT_g<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

ETEC 565 Synthesis This is my fifth course in the MET program. \u00a0The successful completion of this course will mark the halfway point of my experience in learning about educational technology. I have found this course to be a culmination of the previous four courses; somewhat of a halfway-summation of the previous year. \u00a0As I […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3744,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-51","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/ktharris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/51","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/ktharris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/ktharris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/ktharris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3744"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/ktharris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=51"}],"version-history":[{"count":13,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/ktharris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/51\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":75,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/ktharris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/51\/revisions\/75"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/ktharris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=51"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}