Author Archives: Tanya Walsh

Mobile Technology Use in CPD

In the context of Continuing Professional Development (CPD), I don’t see a lot of use of mobile technology for the actual delivery of programs. Most courses remain in the tradition lecture format with supplemental hands-on workshops. There has been some attempts to use audience-response apps such as ‘Poll Everywhere’ or ‘Top Hat’ and these apps are quickly replacing our dependence on iClicker devices in the lecture hall.

Many online courses exist but at this point, most of those I encounter are designed to be viewed on a larger monitor. As technologies now exist to design courses simultaneously for screen, tablet or smartphone, I believe that more courses will be available in this format. For busy professionals, on the go, it will be most beneficial for them to access CPD material anywhere.

One way I do see mobile technology used regularly, is the use of Twitter or other forms of texting during courses and conferences. Large conferences will release a Twitter address for the event. For the organizers, it is a great way to release updated information, such as “Lecture 2 has been moved to Room 7”. Many participants will use the Twitter feed to comment on interesting information they are exposed to. Sometimes their colleagues who were not able to attend the conference will check in on Twitter to see how things are going and if there is any information posted that is relevant to their own work.

Sometimes, the most interesting conversations at a conference happen on Twitter while a lecture is going on. Dozens of people listening to the same lecture will Tweet their comments and questions on the material. Instantly, a small learning community develops with rapid-fire exchanges in real time. Although it can be a distraction, it certainly keeps learners engaged in the subject at hand.

This type of exchange gives learners control within the learning environment, engages others in cooperative learning, gives individuals recognition for their contributions and even fosters friendly competition and challenge when people are trying to best each other at coming up with ideas or other sources information. In short, it hits all of Malone and Lepper’s six categories of intrinsic motivation (1987, as cited in Ciampa, 2013).

Resource:

Ciampa, K. (2013). Learning in a mobile age: An investigation of student motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(1), 82–96.

Lenora’s Challenge

Hi Everyone;

Sorry for the late post.

First of all, I have to say that Lenora impresses me. Despite her lack of experience with technology, she is passionate enough about creating culturally-relevant anti-bullying resources for her colleagues that she is willing to consider creating a website from scratch. However, as you have all discussed already, this may not be the best route for Lenora, considering that she is new to the process and has limited bandwidth at home.

The idea of using Cradleboard as a starting point makes the most sense to me. This established learning community would be an excellent springboard for a discussion about bullying in the classroom, especially as there are probably a lot more people interested in this topic than Lenora is yet aware of.

My suggestion would be to create a social media site on Facebook where Aboriginal educators from all over North America could come together to share resources and discuss relevant issues. Ideally, Cradleboard would allow her to have a widget on their site where she could post her Facebook (FB) link and invite members to join. (A simple email request to the site’s creator could get it started.) Lenora is a very busy person and although she is committed to this process, she needs a platform that runs itself.

The other reason that I like the idea of using Facebook, is because of the importance of communication around this topic within the community. Lenora herself is aware of the importance of reflective practice and a FB community would facilitate this. Bullying is a day-to-day issue in the classroom and it would be great if educators could share their challenges and suggestions with some immediacy.

As many of you have already suggested, once Lenora is ready to post learning resources, it may be wise for her to create a wiki. It could start out as a simple text-based site, but as Lenora improves her digital-literacy skills, she could upgrade the learning assets. It would then serve as a place that she could reference on the FB page and direct people to the resources that she, and perhaps others have created. I imagine that in time, her wiki could really take off. However, I don’t think that it would ever preclude taking advantage of the immediacy and convenience of FB’s social medial platform.

Hope everyone had a nice weekend.

Kind regards,

Tanya

Reference

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

Reflection – Assignment 1 – YESNet

Photo credit: Entering the Yukon Territory of Canada by R. Martin (WikimediaCommons)

Our group (Group 3: YESNet: J. Chrona, M. Gallant, S. Turner, T. Walsh) created a rubric which would be used to select a learning management system (LMS) for the Yukon Ministry of Education which hopes to create blended-learning secondary courses that would serve the needs of First Nations’ communities.

We chose to use Bates’ (2014) SECTIONS framework as the basis for our rubric. I was familiar with Bates’ work having read Bates and Sangra (2011) “Managing Technology in Higher Education” for a summer course. Bates’ expertise really is on choosing technology for post-secondary institutions; however, his framework is broad enough to encompass the issues we thought were important, and it is flexible enough to be applied to any major investment in educational technology, regardless of the institution or educational level at which it is employed.

It was helpful to complete this project as a group because we could benefit from each other’s experience. We each drafted a couple of sections on our own, but then came together to review and fine-tune our rubric. Working it out together took longer than we expected, but still less time than it would have, had we reviewed our own projects individually.

We were lucky to have someone knowledgeable in First Nations culture who could ensure that we did not miss any important elements of Aboriginal educational values. However, every member of our team was committed to ensuring that we were developing a rubric that would be inclusive of diverse student needs and strengths. In other words, we all followed Chickering and Ehrmann’s (1996) description of the seventh principle of good practice in education, which is: respecting diverse talents and ways of learning.

Like Nel, Dreyer, and Carstens (2010) encourage, we focused on their ‘primary criteria’ (enhancing learner-centered educational principles) when deciding on our standards for our LMS. We hoped that the medium chosen would enable instructors to create an excellent learning experience for their students. Although, the Nel, Dreyer and Carstens (2010) study focused on the teaching of language, they point out that the ability of technology to provide “additional possibilities to receive input and produce output…can establish a rich context” for learning to occur (p. 242). Consequently, we wanted our LMS to be supportive of multi-media content both instructor- and student-generated.

It was also crucial that the LMS had networking capability because connection to community is an essential component of education for First Nations’ people (Chrona, 2015). This is, of course, a value that is not exclusive to Aboriginal cultures. Indeed, Porto (2013), describes the importance of social media in education for supporting communication and collaboration. When online instructors work to help their students form learning communities, they often turn to social media such as blogs, wikis and other networking sites (Porto, 2013).

The greatest obstacle that we faced was one of access. As Coates, James, and Baldwin (2005) point out, increasing access to education is a significant reason why educational institutions consider adopting an LMS. Presumably, providing access to quality education is a key reason why the Yukon Ministry of Education was interested in piloting its courses on an LMS for use on the Na Cho Nyak Dun First Nation. However, the nation’s citizens rely primarily on 3G technology, having otherwise only limited bandwidth and reliability when it comes to internet access. So, relying on an LMS may be a double-edged sword. Technology could truly improve access to quality education for First Nations’ people but for those living in remote areas technological disruptions may also hamper their success.

References:

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

Bates, A. W., & Sangra, A. (2011). Managing Technology in Higher Education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

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

Chrona, J. (2015). First people’s principles of learning. Retrieved from https://firstpeoplesprinciplesoflearning.wordpress.com/

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

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

Porto, S. (2013). The uncertain future of learning management systems. The Evolllution: Illuminating the Lifelong Learning Movement. Retrieved from http://evolllution.com/opinions/uncertain-future-learning-management-systems/

My hat’s off to you, Ben!

In my mind, the question Benoit must ask himself is: How will I redesign this course?

He has taken on a great challenge by offering to put his course online. However, as we all know, it will not be as simple as posting his lecture notes and assigned readings. As Coates, James and Baldwin (2005) point out, using an LMS “is associated with the promise of enriched student learning” (p.24). Students will begin the course with certain expectations in terms of technology, and their expectations “need to be matched or exceeded” (Coates, James, & Baldwin, 2005, p. 24).

Benoit appears to have some technological expertise which will serve him well but he must now prepare himself for a more diverse group of learners because having his course online will increase access, bringing in a wider student population. In addition, the use of an LMS comes with some expectation of students progressing at their own pace. So, his course materials have to be organized, uploaded, and tested long before what would normally be the day of the lecture, in a face-to-face delivery format.

My guestimate is that he would need to devote 5-8 weeks to this course conversion, depending on the complexity of his learning resources. (I am basing this number on my own limit experience with content conversion, so I will readily concede my timeframe to someone who better knows what they are talking about. LOL!)

I would think that conceptualizing the redesign would take a full week. Only once that is done, could he begin to consider which platform to use. As a designer, I wouldn’t want the platform to dictate my design from the start. I would like to imagine how I would like the course to operate and then take a look at the two platforms to see what tools each has available to make my design come to life. I would risk poor IST support and/or give the unsupported platform a try if it meant keeping closer to my initial design concept.

Reference:

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.

Tanya’s Flight Path

Photo credit: H. Dunlap; From The Little Lame Prince and His Travelling Cloak by D. Mulock (Wikimedia Commons)

The International Centre for Oral-Systemic Health at the University of Manitoba (UM) is currently developing a curriculum: Oral-Systemic Health Education for Non-Dental Healthcare Providers (UM, 2015). It is my job to take the educational modules developed by our experts and convert them into an online format.

In terms of educational technology, my experience is limited to the use of our LMS, Desire 2 Learn (D2L) and our presentation software, PowerPoint with the Articulate Studio add-on. In terms of multimedia, I am quite confident using voice-editing software but I have only a beginner’s skill in video-editing. I am a very late adopter of smartphone technology, having purchased my first (used) android phone less than one year ago. Personally, I hate telephones, however, since most healthcare professionals use mobile devices, I felt it necessary to become familiar with this technology. I have to say that it is a wonderful luxury having access to the internet wherever I go – that is, when I remember to keep the little thing charged!

The International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) Standards (2008) talk about the importance of designing ‘digital age’ learning experiences. At this point, I think our team is able to produce good quality technology-enriched learning modules. However, I have real trouble meeting the third ISTE Standard: “Model digital age work and learning” (p.1). I do not feel fluent in current educational technology, so I am unable to model or facilitate the effective use of “emerging digital tools” (p. 2) as ISTE suggests. I sincerely hope that by the end of this course, I have a good working knowledge of a range of different learning technologies.

Nel, Dreyer, and Carstens (2010) indicate that the primary criteria that should be used in the selection of educational technology is whether or not it supports learner-centred educational principles. Specifically, they propose using principles much like those outlined by Chickering and Ehrmann (1996) which advocate for active and collaborative learning. Our courses provide some opportunity for students to actively engage with the content and then reflect on their current practice. However, there is no opportunity for collaborative learning. Our courses are ongoing, so students can take them whenever they wish; unfortunately, this means that they are not part of a class cohort and so we cannot guarantee them anyone with whom they can learn. Regardless of this obstacle, I hope to become conversant in the available community and collaboration tools that could be implemented in future renditions of our courses. For example, next term, we will have a class of Family Medicine residents taking one of our online modules within D2L. So as I learn about collaboration tools in this course, I hope to find ways of implementing them within the module that the residents will be taking so that they can share ideas about how to apply what they have learned within their community practice settings.

Bates (2014) makes an adjustment to his previously developed framework ‘SECTIONS’ (Bates & Poole, 2003, as cited in Bates, 2014) by replacing the meaning of ‘N’ from ‘novelty’ to ‘networking’ (p. 298). If I had to choose only one of his framework subjects to concentrate on this term, it would be this one. The only way our learners are actually going to be able to make real changes to patient care is if they have a way to collaborate in the field. At present, we are providing state-of-the-art scientific knowledge on oral-systemic health. However, the real game changer will be if we can give them the tools they need to implement this knowledge. We already provide plenty of open-source educational resources. However, what they need more than anything is a network. I need to learn how healthcare providers are currently networking with each other, what tools they currently have available and whether or not I can piggy-back on the existing tools or if we need to create new ones. I don’t think I will come to an easy answer to this by the end of this course, but I plan to focus on learning about current social media tools and their application in education.

This week, I plan to start by watching how our class uses Twitter. It is a platform that does not come naturally to me. However, I know that it is one used by many professionals. In addition, I will be looking at how Facebook is used in healthcare. I use it regularly to connect with family members, but I have never used it professionally. However, I do know that medical students use it frequently as a way of networking with their colleagues and sharing information.

References:

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

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

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). 2008. Standards for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/standards-for-teachers

University of Manitoba. (2015). International Centre for Oral-Systemic Health. Retrieved from http://umanitoba.ca/icosh/