Synthesis

When first reading the course description for ETEC 565A, I was excited by the prospect to further my knowledge of various learning technologies. My role in my school has evolved over the past few years to include assisting teachers and students integrate technology into their learning/teaching. Being able to evaluate and select learning technologies by first defining school requirements has been something that I have been working at few some time. I regularly find myself being consulted by administration to ‘look’ at various learning technologies that educational technology companies present to school leadership. One of my s=goals for the course was to develop a set of criteria for my school to use when vetting various technologies. By gaining experience using new a new LMS, I am also able to better provide professional development for my peers as we look to integrate eLearning into the program we offer.

ETEC 565A also addressed my interest in mobile technologies and social media. Having introduce a 1:1 iPad program 4 years ago, I am constantly looking for resources and professional development ideas to help staff in their day-to-day teaching. I believe that social media, along with mobile technologies provide great opportunities for learning to extend beyond the traditional classroom. Just this week I introduced a new project for my senior art students that began with an exploration of the ‘selfie’ – where students looked at the tradition of portrait painting and compared how ‘selfies’ are a continuation of that art form. The ability to integrate technology into my teaching has reinvigorated my lessons and provided my with new exciting avenues to enrich the experiences of my students.

 

Module 1 – Selecting and Using Technologies

Week one and two of the course challenged us to take a step back from actual learning technologies and look at broader frameworks of educational technologies. In this way, we were tasked with defining the context within which a learning technology would be used and the requirements that were presented by that context.

Week one presented two readings – the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) publication “National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers” (or NETS). NETS is essentially a list of skills and abilities that define a 21st century teachers. The second reading was Chickering and Ehrmann’s “Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as Lever” (1996), which presented technology as an agent of change in how a teacher taught in a classroom. These two readings identified for me what would become my personal theme for the course which was ‘what were my beliefs about technology and the role they play in my teaching’.

I have always prided myself on trying to create dynamic lessons for my students that inspire them to be creative and agents of change in their world. Technology has always been something that I have tried to integrate into my teaching, but I have not always considered the context of the learning when considering the technology. As I think about my teaching history, I can see now that I often chose learning technologies that were in fashion or were of interest to me personally. When asked to evaluate myself against the ISTE principles, I was happy to see that many of the standards that are trademarks of a 21st century teacher are part of my teaching. I have become a leader in my school with respect to curriculum and educational technology, and ETEC 565A has now given my a greater understanding of how to place learning technologies into a context for teacher.

Week two presented two theoretical frameworks by which we were able to consider technology in relation to pedagogy. Bates and Poole’s SECTIONS framework identifies a sort of criteria to help educators evaluate learning technologies, while Nel, Dreyer and Carstens’ framework focused on identifying primary and secondary criteria.

Bates’ SECTIONS framework resonated with me – each section of the framework acts a checklist for identifying and evaluating potential learning technologies. As my school is currently in the process of determining our new LMS, the Bates framework has provided my with the rationale I needed to make decisions for the school. As I wrote in my original reflection, in the past my administration has spent tens of thousands of dollars on technology (SMART) because they were convinced it was a transformative technology. The boards and the countless hours of PD have gone largely unused. No framework was used to identify the merit of such a technology in our learning environment. What I have come to realize after reading the BATES framework is that there is no such thing as good or bad technology. Technology can only be evaluated in a context – only when considering the technology in a specific environment and with specific users can one truly determine the effectiveness of the technology.

 

Flight Plan

It was during Module One that we completed our first assignment . The assignment served as a way to establish were we had come from and where we as digital learners hoped to go. For me personally, my path into Ed. Tech. has not been very typical  – I do not have a technology background (I am an artist). My interest stems from trying to meet the needs of my students in the world they now inhabit. My areas of interest are in social media and mobile technologies because I truly believe that these two learning technologies will define education as we move forward. Traditional concepts of course schedules and class time will slowly be phased out. eLearning and ‘social’ learning will define education for the next generation of learners. I constantly tell my colleagues that we need to prepare our students for a world that does not yet exist – with skills that will translate into different contexts with different applications. Traditional skills like rote learning have become extinct because everyone has access to unlimited amounts of information, by just accessing their phone. What is important now is teaching students how to filter, understand and use the countless pieces of content that is available to them.

 

Module 2 – Presentation Tools: Spaces, Places and Platforms for Learning

Week three, four and five identified the two common elements for learning technologies: 1) the content, and 2) the delivery platform.

The focus of week three was Learning Management Systems (LMSs) and presented readings that asked us to think critically about the function and value of LMSs. Coates, James and Baldwin (2005) present six drivers for LMS adoption. They are: 1) increased efficiency of teaching; 2) enriched student learning; 3) student expectations; 4) competitive pressure between institutions; 5) increased  demands to access to higher education; and 6) gives university the ability to control and regulate teaching. What stuck me this week was an understanding that at this time in education and LMS is required. The LMS acts as a bridge between the traditional concept of a school to a new dynamic model of eLearning which gives the students the responsibility of learning. At this time, an LMS seems like an intermediary step – a necessary stop which allows educators and students the ability to acquire new skills before moving forward again. Some of the readings from Week three and four focused on reasons why LMSs will not be that method of instruction in the next 5-10 years. Inflexibility is often cited as the key reason for the downfall of a traditional LMS (Porto, 2015), the inability for a student to determine their own learning on their own timetable was the rationale behind the push for eLearning and will be the rationale for the transition way from the traditional LMS.

 

Assignment #1: Online Delivery Platform

During Week 3 and 4 we were split into groups as asked to create an evaluation rubric for an LMS. Given a specific context – we were asked to determine the criteria by which an institution could evaluate an LMS and assess the viability of that LMS. Our situation looked at a specific requirement for uploading and annotation video in a medical school context. Working in small groups provided a nice change from the individual nature of eLearning. Group work can pose challenges – availability, ability to compromise, etc., but I believe our group worked well together as each member naturally gravitated to their area of strength. The actual creation of rubric with which an LMS could be evaluated was a very rewarding assignment. Having just gone through the process of evaluating various learning technologies, I wish that I had taken this course earlier in my career. While it seems like a natural concept to identify your ‘must haves’ or as Wright and Lopes (2014) call them, ‘your non-negotiables’ at the onset of a process, too often we can get caught up in what a learning technology can do rather then what we need it to do.

 

Week 5’s focus was on mobile learning and the reading for the week centred on student motivation. Mobile learning is a passion of mine – I have implemented a 1:1 iPad program in my school, have moved our school to a new LMS which allows teachers the ability to plan and deliver content from mobile devices, and am currently involved in moving our school storage to a cloud service. What I have come to realize, painfully, is that in order for mobile technologies to be fully integrated and become meaningful learning tools in school, pedagogy must change. The greatest barrier that I have encounter to the inclusion of tablets and phones into education is teachers. The fear of not being able to control what is happening in the classroom has made teachers ban mobile devices from their classrooms. As a result I have focused most of the school’s professional development of the past few years on mobile eLearning. What I hope to achieve is a ‘culture’ change. The iPad program has forced teachers to rethink what they have been doing in the classroom and what the goals of their teaching is. This has been a difficult experience for some teachers – it is easy to blame technology, ‘it is a distraction’, ‘it takes too long’, ‘that’s nice, but how can I use that in my classroom?’. In the case study by Ciampa (2013), she identifies that the control over their own learning that mobile devices offered students was one of the key factors in determining the success of the learning technology (p. 89). The goal of any educator should be to provide a opportunities for student success and the personalization of learning offered by mobile apps allows for such an education that more fully meets the needs of the 21st century student.

 

Module 3 – Interaction and Assessment Tools

Module 3 focussed on the interactions, communications and assessments that occur in eLearning environments. Online learning poses its own set o f challenges with respect to interaction and communication – too often poor design can lead to a lack of a sense of belonging or community within a class. While asynchronous communication provides students with the flexibility to work on their own time, not bound by physical location, it can reinforce the feeling od isolation and learning alone. However, good design which incorporated multimedia, opportunities for group work and synchronous communication can create positive learning environments.

Week 6 focussed on communication tools in an eLearning environment and the use of good design to promote active communication within a course of study. Face-to-face learning has the advantage of having a physical aspect to the communication, but that does not ensure that the student is an active participant. Sitting in a lecture hall with over a thousand students is not a ‘personal’ experience and can create the same feelings of isolation as eLearning. When designing an eLearning environment a designer must consider opportunities for: both public and private communication (email and discussion forums), and  synchronous and asynchronous communication (live chat, video conferencing, etc., vs. email and forums). New learning technologies have made this much easier for educators, no longer does creating an  online course require that any knowledge of html or programming. Platforms like Moodle and Blackboard provide teachers with templates for course creation. What is now important is understanding good design and how to promote learning with the course.

Week 7 looked at how to use design to create opportunities for interaction within a course. Anderson’s article on a theory of online learning prompted me to think about the opportunities for student learning in an online environment. Simply filling page after page of a course with text does not make use of the potential in an online course. Students must be challenges to express themselves using different outlet offered digitally. Students now have to ability to use video, audio, animation, and countless other forms to express ideas, making the learning a much more interactive and meaningful experience. This is a shift in pedagogy that sees other forms of communication, that is other then written text, as a valuable and comparable learning outcome. In the same way, educators need to take advantage of those same learning technologies in their course design. As Anderson notes ‘interaction is on of the defining components of the educational process that occurs when a student transforms the inert information passed to them from another and construct it into knowledge with personal application and value’ (p. 55).

Week 8 focussed on assessment tools and the value of assessment in eLearning. Too often teachers fall into the trap of too much assessment, feeling that in order to justify the content there must be a grade attributed to the learning outcome. It almost seems that teachers use assessment as a way to punish students – when the actual purpose of assessment is to promote student learning. In Ontario, we follow a document called ‘Growing Success’ (https://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/policyfunding/growSuccess.pdf)  which describes the differences between formative and summative assessment (now called Assessments  ‘For’ Learning, and Assessments ‘Of’ Learning). In both types of assessment, the purpose is to provide students with opportunities to show what they have learned, to provide feedback to the student and to motivate the student to continue learning.

 

LMS Introductory Module

When tasked with creating an online course I decided to use my Grade 7 art class. The program has recently be redesigned to incorporate the iPad and as a result makes use of many digital resources. While the course will most likely never be offered as an online course, the opportunity to provide the course in a blended environment might be a possibility as we look at ways to include more diversity to our current course of study. The creation of the introductory unit was in itself an introduction to Moodle for me – I have had some experience with online course design, but not to this level. I found the exercise difficult in the sense that I found myself simply posting resources for students, asking them to download readings, complete worksheets and submit assignments. I had fallen in to a cycle of poor design. Where are the opportunities for interaction that Anderson discussed in his reading, where were the opportunities for both synchronous and asynchronous communication? Would my students not feel isolated? Looking back now I realize that I relied on the in class component of the course to provide those opportunities for interaction. Looking ahead to my content unit I made a much more concerted effort to incorporate opportunities for interaction through video and discussion forums  for students to get to know me and their classmates and to demonstrate what they had learned.

 

Module 4 – Social Media

Module 4 focused on social media tools as opportunities to extend student learning. Social media tools provide students with opportunities to connect outside of classroom with individuals and groups from around the world. Social media focusses on user-generated content rather then academic knowledge, creating an entirely new collection of knowledge – social knowledge (think of Wikipedia). Social media creates opportunities for individuals to belong to groups, something that other online platforms have struggles with. Students feel connected to their peers online in ways that are very different then the way they feel about classmates in an eLearning environment. There are many things that designers can learn from social media when it comes to course design. However, with those opportunities for connection and belonging come risks around copyright, privacy and protection of student data.

Week 9 looked at social media and learning and I found Bates’ chapter on social media to be very interesting, especially his list of the educational advantages of social media in education. These include: the development of key skills needed in the digital age; the ability for teachers to set online group work; ability to post media-rich assignments; ability to connect work to e-portfolios; ability to learners to take control of their learning; and the ability to add richness and perspective to the course by opening the scale of the resources (Bates, 2014). However many students are not ready to learn this way yet. Students still require structured support and selected content – they need a teacher supported environment for learning. However that requires teachers to become familiar with and comfortable enough to use social media in their teaching – no small step.

When living in a world where mash-ups are a thing and tools like YouTube and other multimedia tools encourage the re-purposing of found material questions of copyright and ownership become much more complicated. When does intellectual property cease to exist? Is anything private anymore? In my reflection I discussed the artist Richard Prince who reuses Instagram posts and adds new comments and hashtags to the imagery, then prints then image and sells them for  over $100 000 at auction. His argument is that by deleting the original comments and adding his won he has substantially changed the nature of the image and thus it does not fall under copyright laws. This has been dubbed ‘re-photographing’ – who knew? What became evident form me during module 4 was the need to inform students of the importance of copyright and giving credit where it is due, both from an ethical and legal perspective. As a corollary to that to warn students that context does not exist when an image or text is removed from the original post, so they need to be aware of everything they write, post, share, like, etc.

 

Digital Story

It was during week 10 and 11 that we were tasked with creating a digital story that was to accompany our content module in our LMS. I have to admit that I found this assignment difficult. I was unsure (and still am) if I met the assignment criteria. I am pleased with the way that the digital story is part of my content module – I think it serves as something different in the experiences of the students. However I am not pleased with the final product – more about the limitations with the software and my inability to execute my vision. I agree with Ciampa’s statement that ‘multimedia effects such as video, audio, music, animation and interactive capabilities afforded by mobile devices evoke sensory curiosity’ (pg. 84), and I hope that this digital story will create that sense of curiosity in my course. As a side note, I did show my current students my digital story and was pleased with their response. They asked if they could create their own story for a different colour. This is where I think I may have missed the mark of the assignment – I hope my students do not see this as another assignment in the course, but rather as a different way of communicating knowledge.

 

Module 5 – What’s on the Horizon?

Module 5 offered an opportunity to consider changes to education as new technologies emerge. For me one of the most interesting avenues will be Augmented Reality (AR). The ability for teachers to add digital content to the real world will profoundly change how we think about learning. Imagine the opportunities presented when a student (most likely using a mobile device) will be prompted (either location or an actual object) by his or her technology to learn more about a specific subject. Consider a school trip to a foreign city or a museum and having student learn about landmarks or works of art as they physically got close. How personal can learning become? How overwhelming will learning become? Is there a limit to how much we can learn? When looking to the future there will always be more questions then answers – but that is the excitement about education and technology. While we may not know exactly what it will be like, I think we can all agree it will be an amazing experience.

 

Content Module

I am pleased with my final content module which focussed on Colour Theory. As I noted in my reflection, my greatest concern was that my personality would get lost in the digital platform, and this was true for the introductory module. However through the use of video and less of a focus on downloading readings and answering questions, I think that I have been able to re-establish some of the character of my teaching style. I must admit that creating an online course was much more difficult then I anticipated – it took countless hours of making sure that pages looked consistent, that links worked, that resources loaded and that images were linked back to their original source. Besides that technical requirements it also required that I rethink how I teach my course -a successful eLearning experience is not just a digital version of what happens in a traditional classroom – it is itself an entirely new and different learning experience. When it is not treated as such it is easy to understand why student can have negative experiences with online learning.

 

Synthesis

This final assignment – looking back over the course has provided me with the opportunity to see ll that I have learned and how far I still have to go. As I draw near the end of my MET experience I am saddened that the experience will soon be over, but excited that I now bring more to my profession then before. The future of education will be determined not by technology, but by pedagogy. Technology will always be just a tool, when we think it is more then that we run into problems. Student-focussed learning will define education in the 21st century, and technology will be the tool used to create the reality.

 

 

Leave a Reply