Author Archives: Keri Fleming

Professional Connector

The Last Post

Final Synthesis

Part One – Precis of Flight Path

As was stated in my Flight Path assignment, my goals for this course were:

to discern the appropriate scenario for this type of application,
to know the breadth of an LMS,
to ascertain the types of assessment effective in given situations,
to determine if/when the use of (which) social interfaces will be optimal,
to determine which of the many and diverse forms of media would be educationally sound, and
to construct an LMS that perhaps encapsulates some of the pre-packageable content that I teach in the library.

See below for the reflection I have on this initial projection.

Module One: Digital-age Teaching Professionals & Theoretical Frameworks

Learning Objectives:

Identify your personal learning goals for the course, in the context of internationally accepted standards and Seven Principles.
Become familiar with theoretical frameworks and approaches for supporting learning in technology-enriched contexts;
Become familiar with theoretical frameworks and approaches for evaluating technology for use in teaching and learning.

The flight path assignment due during the course of this module was difficult to do in part because I had no idea what this course was about when I signed up. Terms such as Moodle, GUIs, SCORM packages were all completely brand new territory. I often felt like a stray parachuter in a foreign land. The reading from Nel, Dreyer, & Carstens (2010), gave some hint that part of this journey would involve assisting the “Lone Ranger” in making pedagogically sound decisions when selecting educational technology.

The mystery further unraveled when we evaluated ourselves as teachers against the ISTE standards. I thought I’m on the right track when I read standard five, “Teachers continuously improve their professional practice, model life-long learning . . . by promoting and demonstrating the effective use of digital tools and resources.”

The quality of the learning environment was set by reading the professions (and educational legacies) of the other students, by the admonition to peak performance in the course introduction and by Chickering (1996) words, “expect more and you will get it. High expectations are important for everyone. Expecting students to perform well becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.”

Module Two: Learning Management Systems, Other web-based approaches, and Mobile Technologies

Learning Objectives:

Describe the role delivery platforms play in creating rich educational environments;
Think about the challenges and opportunities that come with the new types of LMS;
Estimate time and effort necessary for adopting an LMS platform.
Assess the infrastructure available at the institution or organization in your scenario to support various delivery platforms; and
Successfully select an appropriate delivery platform for your scenario.
Discuss what role mobile technologies play in learning.

With my e-portfolio created it was time to decide Moodle or Blackboard. Porto (2015) notes, that learning the skills and competencies to use new technologies is essential for 21century professionals in all areas. There were moments of confusion in this process most notably while realizing the shift in the 10 years between when the Coates article was written, where they write, “LMS are in the relatively early stages of development,”(2005, p.21) to where Spiro (2014) prophesies their demise: “this will lead to an end of the corporate LMS within 5 years.” Is this really the way to go? Will understanding the structure and design of LMS be pointless? My thinking through this module was that there will probably always be a need for some form of delivery platform for learning. Learning organizations have been making the shift from planning and control to facilitating individual learner needs for some time (Spiro, 2014). Even though empowering users to use their own tools is counterintuitive to the essence of Learning Management Systems (Porto, 2015) the ability to adjust content to student level and allow self-paced learning through mobile technology is ideal for implementing differentiated instruction (Ciampa, 2013).

Module Three: Communication Tools, Interactions for Learning, and Assessment Tools

Learning Objectives:

Describe characteristics of asynchronous and synchronous interactions and determine when and how to integrate such interactions;
Differentiate between one-way and two-way modes of communication in relation to learning technologies.
Identify different kinds of interaction possibilities within online and blended courses.
Consider the role of assessment in student learning and make distinctions between formative and summative assessment strategies;
Differentiate between assessment of learning and assessment as/for learning;
Decide on the assessment strategies for your course.

The pieces that I held tightly to were the Bates (2014) chapters and the Anderson (2008) articles. However it was, that they worded what they were writing about, seemed to make sense to me. Perhaps the kind of learner I am, I needed the structure or frame or foundation to ground/view/build the rest of my learning. SECTIONS provided a place of orientation from what made sense to what I was unfamiliar with. Anderson (2008a) advocates for an approach whereby an appropriate mix of student, teacher, and content interaction is not only possible, but can be designed for each learning outcome. As well, Anderson’s learner/ knowledge/ assessment/ community centred explanations and images reminded me of the new BC curriculum (and accompanying flowcharts). Through both of these authors I was spanning the divide between what was familiar to what was new territory. The parallel of Anderson’s (2008) four “centres” with the BC curriculum, helped shape the way I structured the Introductory module.

I also need to make mention of the Gibbs and Simpson article in its focus on assessment design. As a teacher, assessment is part of everyday. However it is time consuming (and therefore expensive), disliked by both students (and teachers), and largely ineffective in supporting learning (Gibbs & Simpson, 2005). Assessment that supports worthwhile learning, needs to give sufficient study time for the most important tasks, be connected to productive activities, and the feedback given focuses on student performance/learning NOT on the characteristics of the learners themselves (Gibbs & Simpson, 2005).

Module Four: Social Media and Learning, Intellectual Property/Copyright and Privacy, and Multimedia

Learning Objectives:

Become familiar with key social media technologies;
Rethink the use of social media for social change
Consider issues relating to copyright in digital learning spaces;
Integrate resources and create a digital story.
Assess the scope of a multimedia project;
Identify the resources required to develop these multimedia in-house.

With the Introductory module complete, the next task was the digital story – media, about media within media. Seimens (2003) admonition that proper integration of media formats presents students with rich, varied learning while minimizing the weaknesses of each format, meant that the scope and sequence of this needed to be well designed. The role and knowledge of the educator is more important than ever in understanding how to use these tools to bring authentic experiences to students (November, 2012). Without clear guidelines, popular trends (or tools) can drive decisions rather than the educational appropriateness of the technology or media (Boyes, Dowie, & Rumzan, 2005).

As I reviewed the notes for this module, I think my learning edge going forward will be the move away from creating things to be consumed, toward creating spaces where anyone can contribute/edit/create.

Module Five: What’s on the Horizon, and Looking Back, Moving Forward

Learning Objectives:

Look into new trends and ideas about educational technology;
Examine the possibilities of realizing those ideas.
Reflect critically upon your overall ETEC565A experience

For the final reflective reading for the course, I had to choose Bates. His observation, that education brokers seem to be operating in a policy vacuum regarding open learning in general, convey the length/depth of thought he has on this subject (2014). At some point, institutions will need to develop a clearer, more consistent strategy for open learning, in terms of how it can best be provided, how it calibrates with formal learning, and how open learning can be accommodated within the fiscal constraints of the institution (Bates, 2014). That insight seems to echo the ETEC 565 journey for myself. As an education broker I had a policy vacuum for “open” learning (especially in the form of LMS). I needed to develop my thinking for providing such a digital experience, especially within the public education context I work within. The terms by which I could now facilitate those means of learning have come into focus. I am not by any stretch proficient, but have a sense of what the height and depth and breadth could be for a specific situation. Going forward, it will become a matter of practicing what I have learned and applying it in the various situations in which I find myself.

References

Anderson, T. (2008a). Towards a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and practice of

online learning. Edmonton AB: Athabasca University. Retrieved from

http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/02_Anderson_2008-Theory_and_Practice_of_Online_Learning.pdf

Bates, T. (2014). MOOCs. In Teaching in digital age, Chapter 7. Retrieved from

Chapter 5: MOOCs

Bates, T. (2014). Pedagogical differences between media: Social media. In Teaching in digital age, Chapter 9.

Retrieved from http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/chapter/9-5-5-social-media/

Bates. T. (2014). Teaching in a digital Age. Retrieved from http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/chapter/5-8-

assessment-of-learning/

Bates, T. (2014). Teaching in digital age http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/ (Chapter 8 on SECTIONS

framework)

Boyes, J., Dowie, S., & Rumzan, I. (2005). Using the SECTIONS framework to evaluate flash media. Innovate Journal of

Online Education, 2(1). Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?

doi=10.1.1.186.6505&rep=rep1&type=pdf

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

from http://www.aahea.org/articles/sevenprinciples.htm

Ciampa, K. (2013). Learning in a mobile age: An investigation of student motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted

Learning, 30(1), 82–96. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.12036/epdf

Coates, H., James, R., & Baldwin, G. (2005). A critical examination of the effects of Learning Management Systems on

university teaching and learning. Tertiary Education and Management, 11(1), 19-

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11233-004-3567-9

Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2005). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and

Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 3-31. Retrieved from

http://www.open.ac.uk/fast/pdfs/Gibbs%20and%20Simpson%202004-05.pdf

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2008). Standards for teachers. Retrieved from

http://www.iste.org/standards/standards-for-teachers

Nel, C., Dreyer, C., & Carstens, W. A. M. (2010). Educational technologies: A classification and evaluation. Tydskrif vir

letterkunde, 35(4), 238-258. Retrieved from http://www.ajol.info/index.php/tvl/article/download/53794/42346

November, A. (2012). How Twitter can be used as a powerful educational tool. November Learning [Weblog] Retrieved

from http://novemberlearning.com/educational-resources-for-educators/teaching-and-learning-articles/howtwitter-

can-be-used-as-a-powerful-educational-tool/

Siemens, G. (2003). Evaluating media characteristics: Using multimedia to achieve learning outcomes. Elearnspace.

Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/mediacharacteristics.htmUBC

Porto, S. (2015). The uncertain future of Learning Management Systems. The Evolllution: Illuminating the Lifelong

Learning Movement. Retrieved from

Spiro, K. (2014). 5 elearning trends leading to the end of the Learning Management Systems. Retrieved from

http://elearningindustry.com/5-elearning-trends-leading-to-the-end-of-the-learning-management-system

Bates, Alexander, and the Hewlett Packard people.

When I read that the report for K-12 sector was funded by Hewlett Packard, I was a little reluctant to be moved by the findings. We have something similar in BC in the Fraser Report on education. Look up a school by their name and find out how they rate against all the other schools in the province. The results for both studies are, to me, going to be skewed.

When I searched for, and read more about Bryan Alexander, it made sense that he couches his “vision” in story, as his PhD is in Romantic-era Fiction and Poetry. I think it was Jason that wrote, many of the elements mentioned are already in place, making it seem less likely a vision of the future.

The future of education through the eyes of Bates however, seems the most compelling. Bates inferentially acknowledges that in order for “higher” education institutions to retain their relevancy to the general public they need to be providers of some “knowledge” learners want. If the “medium” is MOOCs then those MOOCs will need to integrate technology in ways that strengthen the experience for students. The earlier chapters from Bates serve to give the reader (or creator of a course) tools to use for their future encounters with technology.

Will MOOCs be THE answer? I have yet to find a technological (or educational for that matter) panacea. However, I think that the thinking grounding Bates schema provides those who make use of them, a means to critically assess the strengths and weaknesses of any way of teaching.

Education will only be as good as the sum of its parts and that means individuals bringing their best to the situations they find themselves in. Education can only work when it is flexible, creative and inclusive. If technology works to make those things happen, then it should be used. My concern, as I look forward, is that we (older ones) would not limit the thinking and creativity of those who come after us. The loudest voices are not always the “correct” ones. How I see myself “shaping that landscape” is by providing opportunities for that plastic/elastic practice for the little visionaries that I hang with every day.

References

Alexander, B. (2014). Higher education in 2014: Glimpsing the future. Educause Review, 4(5) Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/higher-education-2024-glimpsing-future?utm_source=Informz&utm_medium=Email+marketing&utm_campaign=EDUCAUSE

Alexander, B. (2016). Bio [webpage]. Retrieved from http://bryanalexander.org/bio/

Bates, T. (2014). MOOCs. In Teaching in digital age. Retrieved from http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/part/chapter-7-moocs/ (Chapter 5)

Fraser Institute. (2016). School performance: Elementary and secondary school rankings. Retrieved from https://www.fraserinstitute.org/school-performance

New Media Consortium. (2015). NMC Horizon Report 2015: Higher ed edition. Retrieved from http://cdn.nmc.org/media/2015-nmc-horizon-report-HE-EN.pdf

LMS Content Module/Digital Story

Digital Story Link

Content Module Link

Reflection on the digital story has been added to both the e-portfolio site and to the Week 11 thread of discussion forum. More reflections will be added (shortly) with regards to the content module. And look at that, here they are:

Assignment #3: LMS Content Module

In the course outline it reads that this assignment will be assessed on the following items:

Your content module should cover approximately a week or two of your course.

Content added since the “intro” version makes it a three week coverage. If you add the “intro” piece it becomes four weeks. With the pattern I had set of introduction, practice, reflection, repeat it could not have been accomplished in less time unless it became traumatizing for the student(s).

A splash page with a customized GUI with at least four (4) navigational components – for Moodle;

Initially I had no idea what this sentence meant, what a goo-ey was, or how I was going to have at least (4) of them. However, the more I looked at example pages, or how-to videos, the more I had a sense of what I liked the look of and what I didn’t. The first presentation (what the viewer sees when they open my Moodle site) fits within the viewer pane, and starts with colour-coded navigational components that reflect the pattern of activity for the module and the course. The eye/brain see in one view, the extent of what they need to see at that time. This is what Mayer’s calls spatial contiguity (Bates, 2014). I liked/used the idea of having a reinforcing message/additional information come up when the cursor hovered over the “button.”

One complete learning module with subject-specific content largely based on HTML pages;

Subject:

I know in my flight path, I had thought this Moodle course assignment would be directed toward elementary aged-students. The more the content and medium shaped itself in my mind, it made more sense to create a course that would help students, by training teachers to be more effective. The course focus is for teachers to learn to model comprehension strategies for their students.

Internal structure:

The structure of the course follows a pattern of instruction, practice, reflection, and try again with a different strategy. I have purposely colour-coded the steps in the pattern to be consistent throughout the course, likening it to the routines set up at the beginning of the year in a typical classroom. Making some things predictable, enables students to focus on learning and not having to re-figure out where things are or where they should go. Gibbs and Simpson (2005) write that student tasks, should focus their time and effort on the most important aspects of the course.

With that in mind I also hyperlinked the assignments to the place where they would be handed in, hyperlinked required reading to be within the page where it gets assigned, and tried to make everything one would need on a specific page available from that page. The less one has to travel the less likely they are to become lost.

Each colour coded block starts with a “roadmap.” This roadmap is framed the same way each occurrence having an overview, content, resources, and assignments/due dates.

I did not opt for badges within the LMS as the focus was on practicing a skill rather than progression through the material. However, students can see if they have completed a particular piece with the presence of a checked box.

With consistent colour coding and patterning, I limited the viewing pane to just the navigational components for each module. I liked how it limited the visual field to just the essentials and reinforced the cyclical nature of the course. With the mind of tidying up and seamlessly incorporating our earlier work from the introductory module into the content module I created a page titled pre-flight checklist. As well, I embedded the digital story into the end of what would be the introductory module.

Embed your digital story. Specifically, while addressing the work you have done on your digital story, reflect on:

*Why was this the right tool for you to use to tell your story, from a pedagogical perspective?

*How did you purposefully select this for your storytelling tool, in pedagogical terms?

I found this “digital story” requirement for the course to be very vague. I looked through the variety of interpretations of this assignment in the example Moodle pages and felt even more uncertain of its purpose/direction. Had I watched the March 12 video-conference recording earlier, this element would not have looked different than it does. I decided to make the digital story to support the theme of the LMS which I was creating for this term project. There are many ways to tell a story. As a librarian, I can show you a few. There are many reasons why stories are used. I chose to interpret this story as a journey that engages for the purpose of conveying some form of message. It made the most sense to use this digital story opportunity to focus on:

the audience – who were they? what would their main concerns be?
state a problem they may be experiencing – ‘doesn’t it make you crazy when . . . ‘
inform of some kind of solution or expertise,
clearly show the benefits of that solution,
invoke some kind of action from them – sign up now or act now

Having the list from Mayer’s (2009) that was in the Bates (2014) article was very helpful to refer to.

I wanted to keep it short. Most people don’t have time for epics, no matter how creative they are.

I wanted to keep it on topic. Keeping the content focused will help the viewer be convinced that the content is useful (or not) for them.

I also wanted it to be succinct. Conveying the essentials is both bait and net. It communicates the message that, “You could have more of these helpful tidbits if you signed up for this course.”

To create this digital story I used the tool PowToon. I have never used anything like PowToon. Creating a “storyline” with animations, music, pictures, and text is very complicated. The more streamlined it looks, the more effort went into the product. To me it was important to choose people characters as opposed to icons. It also made sense to limit the message to a specific need a teacher would have. Unless it is directly helpful to them, or related to the age level they teach most teachers do not have time for “extra,” and are pretty surgical about limiting their intake. Knowing this, it made sense to focus the message.

Production elements such as timing the text and movements of the characters is a trial and error process. Choosing music that doesn’t detract from the overall theme is time consuming. Selecting size of image or word that won’t over-power or weaken the message is daunting. Using these forms of media to convey what scores of pages of text could not has, as Siemens (2003) writes, “it’s own strengths and weaknesses. The plethora of options available presents a challenge and an opportunity.”

One additional general discussion forum topic;

This element is satisfied in a couple of different ways within this course. First, I have included a chat forum after the first assignment for students to debrief or talk about how the implementation went. Secondly, is through the feedback that each student will give each other from assessing their strategy implementations. As part of the “cycle,” students are required to reflect on whether they achieved the objectives they have set out by viewing their own (and on another student’s) video upload. The focus is not on their “performance,” but on how their goals matched their ends.

One group discussion forum for (at least) 2 groups;

This element was satisfied through forming two groups: the fiction-text and non-fiction-text groups, to discuss the features/drawbacks of each. We all have types of text of which we are more fond. The purpose of this was to have a discussion forum, with content that was directly related to the overall purposes of the LMS.

A reflection upon your experience completing this assignment. Be sure to cite relevant literature.

Good course design requires a need for that course, solid content, and the skillful adjudication of various learning elements and mediums to the objectives for the course. Merely piling on more, shiny, new, and amazing technology litters the journey with minefields jeopardizing what could potentially be accomplished. By applying the SECTIONS framework to guide media and technology selection at the beginning of a project, instructional development teams can approach decision-making in an organized manner while placing a high priority on learning outcomes Boyes, Dowie, & Rumzan (2005). Reflecting on this schema, gave me a sort of threshing floor. Whatever elements were being considered could be evaluated and either left behind as “chaff” or used as a kernel of design/content.

Good course design needs to include making a course appealing and applicable to many different students. There are different ways of creating adaptive content. It can be accomplished by tagging learning components and making them smart, by offering personalized learning paths based on the outcome of previous activities (Spiro 2014). I tried to incorporate this with the cyclical nature of the course structure. Students would be practicing a skill which they had defined the objectives to, and would be adjusting with each new module. Appeal isn’t just reflected by the number of students, but to the diversity of them as well.

Good course design needs to provide forums for feedback. In the “Good Readers” course, the feedback elements focus on students’ performance, on their learning and on actions under the students’ control, rather than on the students themselves and on their characteristics. This echoes condition five from Gibbs and Simpson (2005).

Anderson (2008) also reflects this sentiment in a slightly different way by noting, students also need opportunities to reflect upon their own thinking in order to develop automacy, which is a useful and necessary skill for expert thinking. At the risk of repetition, this again is why students of Good Readers are groomed to try the task, evaluate and try again.

Porto (2015) notes that social media can enhance sharing and collaboration, and in many situations enhances the ease of managing the learning experience. I thought about inserting one into the course (I have three Twitter accounts), but it seemed to be more me just wanting to add it because it would “look” good rather than “be” a good choice. For a different situation it may be just the thing.

As was noted, some of these requirements were straightforward, while others were more challenging. The challenge was to keep the vision one had for their course in clear focus while navigating pedagogical elements, design requirements, and the balance between being educational and technological. The ability to practice these challenges throughout the process in making the LMS, first in small steps, later in larger ones, calls to mind Anderson’s (2008) admonition that the opportunity for reflection offers a student’s the capacity to transfer their knowledge to unfamiliar contexts and to develop new knowledge structures. The content module was indeed a transfer of knowledge to an unfamiliar context. Challenging but rewarding.

References

Anderson, T. (2008). Teaching in an online learning context. In Anderson, T. & Elloumi, F. Theory and practice of online learning. Athabasca University. Retrieved from http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/14_Anderson_2008-Theory_and_Practice_of_Online_Learning.pdf

Bates, T. (2014). Teaching in digital age http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/ (Chapter 8 on SECTIONS framework)

Boyes, J., Dowie, S., & Rumzan, I. (2005). Using the SECTIONS framework to evaluate flash media. Using the SECTIONS framework to evaluate flash media, 2(1). Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.186.6505&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2005). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 3-31. Retrieved from http://www.open.ac.uk/fast/pdfs/Gibbs%20and%20Simpson%202004-05.pdf

Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Porto, S. (2015). The uncertain future of Learning Management Systems. The Evolllution: Illuminating the Lifelong Learning Movement. Retrieved from http://www.evolllution.com/opinions/uncertain-future-learning-management-systems/

Siemens, G. (2003). Evaluating media characteristics: Using multimedia to achieve learning outcomes. Elearnspace. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/mediacharacteristics.htm

Spiro, K. (2014). 5 elearning trends leading to the end of the Learning Management Systems. Retrieved from http://elearningindustry.com/5-elearning-trends-leading-to-the-end-of-the-learning-management-system

Digital Story

The link to my DS is

I have made the digital story to support the theme of the LMS created for this term project. There are many ways to tell a story.

There are many reasons why stories are used.

In one sense a story is a journey that engages for the purpose of conveying some form of message.

It made the most sense to me to use this digital story opportunity to focus on:

the audience for this course – who were they? what would their main concerns be?
state a problem they may be experiencing – ‘doesn’t it make you crazy when . . . ‘
inform of some kind of solution or expertise,
clearly show the benefits of that solution,
invoke some kind of action from them – sign up now or act now

I wanted to keep it short. Most people don’t have time for epics, no matter how creative they are.

I wanted to keep it on topic. Keeping the content focused will help the viewer be convinced that the content is useful (or not) for them.

I also wanted it to be succinct. Conveying the essentials is both bait and net. In this case, it communicates the message that, “You could have more of these helpful tidbits if you signed up for this course.”

To create this digital story I used the tool PowToon. I have never used anything like PowToon. Creating a “storyline” with animations, music, pictures, and text is very complicated. The more streamlined it looks, the more effort went into the product. Timing the text and movements of the characters is a trial and error process. Choosing music that doesn’t detract from the overall theme is time consuming. Selecting size of image or word that won’t over-power or weaken the message is daunting. Having the list from Mayer’s (2009) that was in the Bates (2014) article was very helpful to refer to.

I can see how having a team would enrich the content/message. I can also see how this type of tool can capture what scores of pages of text could not. I would like to see where else this would/could be effective. I would like to try other tools, to determine the effectiveness of the features that accompany them.

Bates, T. (2014). Teaching in a digital age http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/ (Chapter 8 on SECTIONS framework)

Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Bedroom Selfies

My first foray into the concept of “digital footprint” happened in 2010 just after I got my school issued iPad. The school where I was working at the time had a cart of iPads. I was going through them one day deleting the masses of pictures on the camera rolls (I know, don’t even say it), when I came across a picture of my husband and myself sitting in our bedroom (clothes on). I had been showing him how to use an iPad to take a picture (remember this was 2010 the selfie wasn’t a phenom yet), and yet here we were on an iPad in the storage room of a school. Welcome to the Cloud! Our school district was just beginning what would be the largest deployment of iPads in NA, and there would be many kinks (like this one) to work out. I have always been very aware of the level of decorum expected from elementary school teachers by the Canadian public, so this “seeing myself” was a shocker.

Part of what we do in the two elementary schools I work, is guide students through the Digital Citizenship curriculum set out by MediaSmarts. However, digital citizenship isn’t so much checking off a box, as grooming a mindset of awareness.

Copyright is an issue that comes up all the time at school. Printing a picture off the internet, showing a movie (whether educational or not), photocopying the cover of a book for display were all occasions where strict copyright rules would forbid. I think part of the “fair dealing” push came from the arena of education, where the use of a picture wasn’t because someone was trying to claim the picture as their own, but that it perfectly showed what that person was trying to show their students.

Copyright also comes up during discussion at school for projects, where students are asked to cite sources, acknowledge photos, and reference background music (those conversations have to start somewhere).

Copyright also came up during a conversation with a Zumba instructor I met who was raised in Chile. She said copyright is never even thought about there, and it was quite an eye-opener for her upon coming to Canada to have to consider that in her selection of music, as well as knowing that part of her yearly membership fees (who knew there was a Zumba teacher association) was going to pay for use of music.

Introverted Socializing

The [only] advantage of having 4 meetings this week is that I get to learn much from my esteemed colleagues. (I think I am the last to post on this).

Hopefully the posted link will work. It is to a YouTube that conveys the flux caused by the interface of information and people. Much of this is also paralleled in the Bates (2014) article in his delineation of the features that make social media distinct.

The question of what new learning outcomes could the use of social media help develop could be more accurately stated, how has social media helped to bring to the surface and satisfy the real learning outcomes of those who are learning?

The traditional educational structure of top down information transfer is currently most evidently foiled (foil here means opposite) in learning constructs “mediumed” in social media where end users are empowered to access and change information. Bates (2014) cites the use of the term democratizing, with regard to the use of information.

In light of this, the question of would it be better just to add social media to the course or to re-design it around social media, would depend on the intents and purposes of those after that information. If they are in a top down structure, it will depend on who is on the top. If they are co-creators of information, then the end result will be up to those contributing.

However, I believe the intent of the original questions were to induct the strengths/weaknesses of social media in an educational context to our thinking, especially to one we are currently in. In order to be pedagogically useful Bates calls for a “middle ground,” where clear educational philosophy grounds and guides social media implementation. In the current K-7, Canadian/BC elementary school context [here meaning the schools where I work] , students are “using” social media only in the form of “being educated about the potential dangers of using it and creating a digital tattoo.” Tragic that the implied focus is that learners are passive receivers as opposed to active participants.

Bates, T. (2014). Pedagogical differences between media: Social media. In Teaching in digital age. Retrieved from http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/chapter/9-5-5-social-media/ (Chapter 7, point 6)

Esteves, J. (2016, 01, 18). Did You Know 2016 [YouTube]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqZiIO0YI7Y

Reading Moodle

The reflection for this Introductory Module will follow the outline of assessment criteria given for LMS Introductory Module.

Let me start by writing that for this project I decided to use Moodle (I had never even heard of Moodle until this course). I decided to design a “fully online” course directed toward teachers of elementary aged students, with the course content focused on how to increase the reading effectiveness of students by increasing the effectiveness of strategic teaching. The link is here.

In the course outline, it reads that the introductory module will be assessed for:

the introductory activity;

My introductory activity was based on a citation found in Anderson (2008). Anderson refers to the work of Dixon (2007) and her work in breaking ice. I read the article (the one cited) and found the work of Dixon and her colleagues would fit with the clientele for my course, teachers. As Dixon writes, “ways in which learners are encouraged and supported to connect, and develop relationships with colleagues who have similar interests and/or compatible work habits, are needed.” Although her research studied the implementation of icebreaker activities which help to create social presence in online environments, I knew my “students” would be teachers. Creating social presence would need to move past the potentially surfacing self-efficacious posturing into something creative and dare I write, “fun.”

having 3 substantive HTML pages;

I chose to go with 4 separate pages of substantive content. I looked through all I wanted to convey, felt that it would be best conveyed in four separate pages. Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000) make the case for cognitive presence, social presence, and teaching presence in higher learning. Each of these introductory pages provide the foundation on which the higher order thinking — with space for constructing meaning, projecting personness, and the design and facilitation of teaching–possible in online courses, can thrive (Garrison et al. 2000: 91).

having logical and organized structure;

As I have just conveyed in the last section, I divided the content up into four sections: structure (Open Me First), content (Behind the Scenes), communication (Inner Circle), and assessment (Begin at the End). I felt these categories, not so far off from Anderson’s (2008) knowledge-centred, assessment-centred, learner-centred, and community-centred divisions, would group the information in a straightforward and cohesive manner. One-stop-shopping, so to speak.

having early information for students;

The list that Mayer’s authored and that appears in Bates (2014) was helpful for selecting the what should be included and the how should that be formatted for this section. I took Mayer’s (2009) advice that design should be simple, cued, segmented, and simultaneously present content. Further to this, content was also personalized and conversational in style of the voice.

having a reflection on the experience; and

This project felt like archaeology (or rather what I think archaeology would feel like). “Oh look, I have worked for hours and look! there is the toe of the archaeopteryx.” I think I wrote, in one of the first reading responses, that with really good LMSs, one doesn’t notice the structure or the design. The focus becomes the content and the purpose for the course. Ironic that it is best represented when it is invisible. However, it can only get there when a crazy amount of work and thought goes into the design. In their research Coates, James and Baldwin (2005) conclude that, although LMS are here to stay, there is still much to be learned about whether they augment and complement, or if they will substitute the methods used to learn (Coates et al. 2005: 33).

The other surprise from this experience is that I want to learn coding. Some of what I wanted to do, or how I wanted the site to look was limited by inexperience. I do not like the guerilla style of learning by scouring through YouTube looking for “three letter word descriptor sentences” because I don’t actually know what that kind of file is called. “What! It can’t be 2 AM.”

having a reflection on the communication and assessment strategies that will be used in the course.

My plan at this point, with regard to communication, is to exploit its asynchronous characteristics through its time-zone flexibility, response-time expansiveness, and that responses from that form tend to reflect higher-order thinking. As far as synchronous communication forms, I hope to fully make use of the nuances of voice, facial expression, body language and their real-time catalyst to creativity. Either way, they happen in community, which, as the authors Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000) note, is a “valuable, if not necessary, context for an educational experience if critical thinking is to be facilitated and deep learning is to be an outcome” (Garrison et al. 2000: 91).

My plan at this point, with regard to assessment, is to align the reacquaint myself with the work of Cameron & Gregory, and that of Clarke, Owens, and Sutton. The former focuses on aligning letter grades with learning outcomes; the latter focuses on creating the conditions for independence in learners. We have spent some time on assessment as a district, especially with the new provincial directive toward competencies, taking the emphasis off task and placing it on skill.

As Gibbs & Simpson (2008) have noted, teachers “have to assess everything that moves in order to capture students’ time and energy” (p. 8). However they also write that, “some assignments create appropriate learning activities as a by-product”, and “some assessment generates unhelpful and inappropriate learning activities” (p. 15). As with other elements of this subject, ensuring the alignment of process to product is crucial.

At first glance, it may seem “easy” to just build a website as the unreferenced quote at the beginning of ETEC 565 Module 2 asserts. However, one doesn’t have to navigate very far forward to recognize that, in order to make an LMS worth anyone’s while, it must be well designed. As well, it takes an incredible amount of work for it to blend in to the background.

Some final thoughts about the actual site:

I included a hyperlink to Tumblebooks Daily, for potential serendipitous inspiration. All the strategies that will be used and practiced in the course can be done with picture books. What if you need a book and don’t have one, or don’t know what to look for? Service provided, top right corner. Plus, the book gets read out loud for you!! Win-win.

I have set the course to start January 2017. Not for any other reason than it seemed easier to manage (in my mind) the number of weeks for the course duration. The course administrator for ETEC 565 will be able to “read” that, having access to all parts of the course. However, just wanted whoever reads this to know that the absence of Events actually isn’t an absence, but rather a delay. 🙂

References

Anderson, T. (2008). Teaching in an online learning context. In Anderson, T. & Elloumi, F. Theory and practice of online learning. Athabasca University. Retrieved from http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/14_Anderson_2008-Theory_and_Practice_of_Online_Learning.pdf

Bates, T. (2014). Teaching in a digital age http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/ (Chapter 8 on SECTIONS framework)

Cameron, C., and Gregory, K. (2014). Rethinking letter grades: a five step approach for aligning letter grades to learning standards (2nd ed). Winnipeg: Portage & Main.

Clarke, P., Owens, T., and Sutton, R. (2006). Creating independent student learners: a practical guide to assessment for learning. Winnipeg: Portage & Main.

Coates, H. James, R., & Baldwin, G. (2005). A critical examination of the effects of Learning Management Systems on university teaching and learning. Tertiary Education and Management, 11(1), 19-36. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11233-004-3567-9

Dixon, J. (2007). Breaking the ice: Supporting collaboration and the development of community online. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 32(2). Retrieved February 2016, from http://www.cjlt.ca/content/vol32.2/dixon.html

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105. Retrieved from http://www.anitacrawley.net/Articles/GarrisonAndersonArcher2000.pdf

Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Assessment or Evaluation?

Planning for learning is, according to Wiggins & McTighe (2005), “to be more thoughtful and specific about our purposes and what they imply” (p. 14). Using a planning methodology such as the backward design of Wiggins and McTighe (2005), is a great place to start. When designing assessment methods, thought needs to be given to the purpose of the assessment, and those that are being assessed. Despite the pitfalls outlined by Brown (2001), I believe the challenge I will have in the assessment methods I choose, is that they will be used with teachers. Teachers, and learning, and feedback, and improvement, are all words intricately woven into perceptions of self-efficacy for teachers. After all, teaching learners is what teachers do. In order to assess for the planned learning objectives, I am going to need to build motivation for “student” improvement in such a way that sets aside performance posturing/anxiety/paralysis and helps them forget, for the moment, that they are teachers [read: are learning].

References

Brown, G. (2001). Assessment series 3. Assessment: a guide for lecturers. LTSN Generic Centre: York.

Wiggins, G. McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Retrieved from https://books.google.ca/books?id=hL9nBwAAQBAJ&pg=PA13&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false

With regards to Boris

The scenario regarding Boris seems to be directly built on the following paragraph from Gibbs and Simpson (2005):

“It is a common observation of higher education teachers that if

coursework is taken away from a module due to resource constraints,

students simply do not do the associated studying; for example

students will rarely write unassessed essays. It is argued that you

have to assess everything that moves in order to capture students’

time and energy. However, coursework does not have to be marked

to generate the necessary learning. Forbes & Spence (1991) reported

a study of assessment on an engineering course at Strathclyde

University. When lecturers stopped marking weekly problem sheets

because they were simply too busy, students did indeed stop tackling

the problems, and their exam marks went down as a consequence.

But when lecturers introduced periodic peer-assessment of the

problem sheets — as a course requirement but without the marks

contributing — students’ exam marks increased dramatically to a level

well above that achieved previously when lecturers did the marking.

What achieved the learning was the quality of student engagement

in learning tasks, not teachers doing lots of marking. The trick

when designing assessment regimes is to generate engagement with

learning tasks without generating piles of marking” (p. 6).

The trick for Boris will be coming up with a peer-assessed periodic review of the periodic table.

Reference

Getting Advice from a Gamer

Most of my online or mixed-mode course experience has been a bit generous on the assessment and knowledge, and a bit lean on the community and learner.

Anderson (2008) outlines tools that would help facilitate knowledge-centred experience need to connect the big-picture with the fire-hose abundance of information in a way where students can personalize and “grow their own knowledge and discipline-centred discoveries” (p. 49). These would draw on the specific knowledge of the discipline as well as that of the community members. Examples of this in our Connect course these have looked like:

Articles, chapters, and excerpts in the library course reserve list;
Extensive course outlines detailing objectives, scope and sequence;
Static pages of how-to-set-up WordPress, and other accounts.

Assessment-centred attributes are characterized as being “project and workplace-based, constructed collaboratively, benefit from peer and expert review and which are infused with opportunity and requirement for self-assessment” (p. 50). In our Connect course, assessment examples have looked like:

Reflection assignments in the form of case studies and interpretations;
Collaborative assignments (evaluation rubric);
ePortfolio;
Creation of LMS.

Community-centred attributes, according to Wilson (1997) are those where participants have a “shared sense of belonging, trust, expectation of learning and a commitment to participate in and contribute to community.” It also needs to be flexible to reflect the members of the community and reflexive, meaning: continuously able to recalibrate to the changes in that community. In our Connect course these have looked like:

Evaluation rubric;
Pros and Cons piece;
Discussion forums (“Saying Hello,” queries about the course (etc.), and reflections on posts);
RSS feed.

Finally learner-centred (or “learning-centred” Anderson, 2008, p. 47) must start with an understanding of the learner as having understandings, culture, and uniqueness, and be able to provide means and occasion for that to be shared. It must continue with an understanding that the community of learners and how that community interfaces with the subject matter will also have understandings, culture, and uniqueness. In our Connect course these have looked like:

Discussion forum (“Saying Hello”);
Reflection posts such as this one where the learner is asked to apply reading to own situation;

As far as using creating meaningful interactions within the LMS course we are to create, the learning technologies tools used will need to match the objectives sought within the structure of relationships created. There are so many web-based tools available now compared to those outlined in the Anderson article. Knowing which to use would need to be a reflexive enterprise in a live course, as each of those four will interact and have varying influence with each other given different situations. Prensky’s list (2001, p. 14) will be one I will be consulting as I continue to refine the work I’m doing in Moodle.

References

Anderson, T. (2008a). Towards a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning. Edmonton AB: Athabasca University. Retrieved from http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/02_Anderson_2008-Theory_and_Practice_of_Online_Learning.pdf

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill. Retrieved from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Ch3-Digital%20Game-Based%20Learning.pdf