Learning Technologies: Selection, Design, & Application

1. What do you think about the perspectives of MOOC?

The ideas of open education as Bates (2014) suggests on the surface sound very appealing to the overall goal of educating the masses.  After all, education for all, open access to programs and courses, along with the ability to access research and textbooks certainly on the surface support this goal.  MOOCs certainly do provide open access to programs and courses along with research and textbooks.  I do find that the concept of increasing availability of open course design as integral to the development of some of the 21st century learning objectives that we are working towards with our students.  As Bates (2014) suggests, the greater focus on skill development is a strength to open learning course designs.  Further, Bates (2014) suggests that Open Education will further develop the learner-centered approach, which is also a key component in Anderson’s (2008a) article.  I know from this perspective, I work hard in my own classroom to develop these learner-centered approaches to concept and skill development, encouraging the management of learning in an individual manner, developing skills necessary to be successful in both problem, and project based learning opportunities.  Finally, as suggested by Bates (2014), a collaborative learning experience is enables students to work in the higher levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy and Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences.  These are areas again that are integral in the day-to-day workings of many classrooms.  

2. Could this globally targeted format of learning be used locally, with some better results?

Thinking from the perspective of a publically funded education system (K-12), the usefulness of MOOCs and Open Education Resources (OERs) makes sense in terms of the affordability issues that public education systems face.  I agree with Bates (2014) however, in that these OERs need to be carefully designed in order for them to be integrated successfully at any education level.   Providing alternatives and choice for students in today’s day and age are an important component, and given that MOOCs are an alternative, it would be important that they can be integrated and modified to meet the needs of each situation in question for them to be successful.  I think that if these aspects can be built upon then the global target can be utilized successfully in a more local environment.  For instance, many educators use some form of online platform (blogs, websites) to support their learning environment.  MOOCs are but another tool that could be utilized within this role.

Reference

• Bates, T. (2014). Chapter 10: Trends in Open Education. Teaching in digital age (online book)

Over the course of looking at what my partner and I have created through assignment 2, it was great to have the opportunity to look closely at one of the themes and generate some detail and substance for our learners.  One of the great opportunities that I felt arose from this assignment was the opportunity to be very reflective in decisions around why we chose to include elements, tools, and assessment components centered around the learning outcomes.  I think that one of the biggest challenges faced by teachers and educators today is the demand for students to be learning as much as they can in a very short period of time.  As I mentioned in my reflection around assignment 2, this creates a “complete as quick as possible ideal or mindset” due to the constraints placed upon us by the sheer number of curricular outcomes.  Reflective through this assignment I learned that the digital tools and elements that we used and utilized will enable me to be stronger at covering content in a thoughtful, sequential and in-depth manner without compromising what needs to be taught and completed.  One area that I profess to not be as confident in as my partner was the usefulness in gaming that is strategically developed to support the learning process.  This had me thinking as we finished up this assignment to opportunities that I know have arisen before in class that would have been supported well through gaming.  Further, it made me think about how students, especially those at the age that I teach, view gaming, are active participants in gaming, and how the communication that they utilize supports them in the process.
Again, with this assignment as with the first two where I have worked in groups, I was such an active participant and engaged in the process due to the collaborative nature of these assignments.  Throughout my courses thus far in the MET program, I am thoroughly enjoying the collaborative side of the process as learning through a community of learners is most certainly most beneficial to my learning needs.  This assignment also enabled me to be very reflective again and I enjoyed the opportunity to continue to practice being a reflective learner.

Evgeny Morozov in his critique of technological solutionizm (in “To Save Everything Click Here”, Chapter 6), distinguishes between the restrictive/prohibitive technological design solutions and those, which instead offer a broader range of choices.

1. What examples of the restrictive and the choice broadening types of solutions you know from your professional and learning experiences, or have encountered while working with educational technologies?

As has been suggested by others who have posted this week, after reading this article, it became very apparent to me that there are many future challenges that lay ahead surrounding the issues of anonymity and security when accessing and utilizing the affordances of the web in everyday educational settings.  In British Columbia, and in my school district, we were recently required to take Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy training.  Although I would argue that this training was not as extensive as it needs to be and as mandatory (we basically had to walk ourselves through a webinar and sign off that we had accessed it), it did give me some food for thought.  I do see the merits of having the restrictive access abilities to only be using certain educational technologies with students.  It protects not only their rights and freedoms, but ensures that educators are aware of how to ensure anonymity and privacy are protected.

However important these restrictive abilities are (having to use technologies that store information in local servers only), one might also argue that in order for the experience for our students to be authentic and engaging, there need be an opening up of more broader parameters for educational technology use.  How this is to be done, remains to be see.  I know from personal experience from those I work with, there are many conversations when the topic of using technologies in learning are brought up, that many will ultimately choose to forego the affordances that these technologies have because they are too restrictive in their use or they use these technologies with their students anyways.  While my school and many throughout our district have implemented Google Apps for Education and the subsequent platforms that are available (Google Classroom), this process was a very lengthy and arduous process for our technology implementation team.  Given that we are now utilizing GAFE in our classrooms, students and parents alike had to sign consent forms that let parents know that their child’s information was to possibly be stored outside of the province.  What I would be curious to see now when students login to their GAFE accounts, how Google has altered through their complex systems of algorithms the search characteristics that appear for students.  I know that I see how Google alters my suggestions for Youtube videos for instance.

Given the wide range of digital tools that are available to educators and students to both develop content and work within Anderson’s (2008a) four key attributes of learning; learner, knowledge, assessment, and community centered, I have created a digital element element through emaze which could be used in conjunction with the first lesson in my course content module around digital citizenship. I have seen many of my students use this platform before and so I thought I would give it a try.  My students are very well versed in the use of digital presentation tools and in any given set of presentations on a topic, utilizing an inquiry based learning style in my classroom, I will see digital presentations from a variety of great platforms. One of the best affordances that this offers myself and my students is the opportunity to collaboratively evaluate the pros and cons of each platform.

The main digital tool that is utilized within my emaze presentation is an edpuzzle. Edpuzzle is a web tool or element which teachers can use to engage students with video.  The tool engages students in their learning through videos and provides educators with the opportunity to formally assess their students through both a formative and summative assessment process.  The videos can also be utilized through the flipped classroom model.  Educators can take a video that they would normally use in a lesson and incorporate questions that the students will be asked to answer before they are able to continue with watching the video.  For further understanding of how this tool can be utilized, please access the edpuzzle website.  The website does ask for a teacher to set up an account, but is free to use and unlimited in the number of edpuzzle videos created.  Students will be required to set up an account to be able to access the video through the user code provided for each video.  What is great about this tool is that it can be utilized throughout a lesson at any time to consolidate learning and students success can be tracked and recorded throughout.

Here is the link to my emaze presentation:https://www.emaze.com/@ALWZWIRC/presentation-name 

Further to this digital element, another element that I find very useful in the classroom is Kahoot.it! Kahoot allows educators to search or create their own online forms of quizzes that students can access (without signing up, as all that is required is a game pin) to challenge each other in a friendly competition.  It is a great opportunity to generate collaboration and social learning while providing the edge of having a little competition.  Within my classroom, when I have used this platform or element with my students feedback is extremely positive and students wish to continually challenge one another to the game.

What I enjoy most about using these elements in the classroom and within Assignment 3 is the level of student engagement and enthusiasm for using the elements within their learning.  Given theaffordances of using these elements across any platform or device also provides students and educators with the convenience and ease of being able to utilize the tools in almost any setting.

 Reference

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. (PDF).

1. What type of authorship license you would chose for your Learning Module Project (the Assignment 2 or Assignment 3)?

The question of authorship license most certainly plays an integral role in the field of academia.  As others have already mentioned, authorship and credit for authorship is integral for copyright infringement to be avoided.  For the Learning Module Project (Assignment 2 and 3) I would choose a very open authorship license.  I would choose very open because as an educator, I am a firm believer in open dialogue between educators and open sharing of resources that will best support the students that we are educating.  As such I would choose to establish sharing rights to my assignment through Creative Commons.  Of the six authorship licenses, I would choose Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike as it affords others the greatest opportunity to be creative with the materials that I am using, and given that this license provides for NonCommercial sharing, it would be something that I think would best fit educational sharing of ideas and best practices between educators.

In regards to authorship license, I question in today’s ever changing world the open public domain affordance that grants public use after 50 years for most materials in Canada.  While I am all for crediting authorship and think that this must remain integral to works that are available to all, the wave surrounding the 21st century and dissemination of information occurs at a very rapid pace with internet use.  As such, information changes rapidly, and by the time this information might be free to use publically, it is already a ¨relic¨ to what you can access through the internet.

2. If that is a group project, what your colleagues would choose? What negotiations procedure, you would offer to your group members to come to an agreement on the licensing options for your project?

In regards to question #2, I believe that my colleague would also choose to go the route of Creative Commons.  Given that she is an educator as well, I believe that she would choose the most open option to provide others with the opportunity to learn and utilize her work in the classroom as would I.  Throughout the first four courses of the MET program, I have yet to work in a group where licensing agreement was a challenge.  Another affordance that I appreciate with Creative Commons is the six possibilities that are available to authorship of work.  I believe that one of these six would stand out in a group based project in this program.

3. How does the discussion of copyright and internet freedom influence your teaching?

The discussion of copyright and internet freedom is a daily conversation and teachable moment with students when teaching in my classroom.  In the age of information that we live in, students have quick and easy access to a wealth of information.  One of the largest challenges that many educators face is ensuring that they teach the digital citizenship necessary to enable students to see the necessity for giving credit to works used.  I know that when I begin a project that requires the use of the internet to gather and collect information, I have conversations to remind students of the importance of how we are to use others works to avoid copyright infringement.  Students are very understanding to the importance of giving credit to others work.  I know that as an educator, I have to be very mindful of how I use resources that I have accessed to ensure that I practice what I teach in the eyes of the students.  One area that I hope to get better with this is my blog and class website.

1. What new learning outcomes could the use of social media help develop?

Social media use in the classroom is further enhancing the digital literacies of our students in the push for 21st century learning models.  One of the first learning outcomes that social media can help develop is centralized around the extent of control afforded to the learner (Bates, 2014).  As we strive for 21st century learning pedagogy which includes collaboration skill development, connectivity, and the ability to create content, social media with its simplistic software (Bates, 2014) offers educators with some of the tools necessary for development of digital literacy.  These tools will in turn afford students with the development of critical thinking skills, communication skills, and content acquisition.  In particular, the learning outcome that I think becomes very paramount in our society today is the ability to be a critical thinker, and as Bates (2014) suggests, social media raises the issue of quality information gathering.  Giving students the opportunity to learn to differentiate between the reliable and accurate, and the unreliable and bias are extremely important skills for students to develop with the bombardment of media literacy on a daily basis.

2. Consider an example of popular Social Media, use the SECTIONS model for evaluation: explain to what extent, you think, using this media would improve the instruction,if at all?

Given that this weeks topic addresses the educational validity of Twitter, I will use this as my example to evaluate using SECTIONS.

Students: Students can create a community of learners around a given topic.  They create a critical thinking space and learn to become concise and deliver their message in very short formed manner.

Ease of Use: Twitter affords ease of use (is very much user friendly).  Login is straight forward and finding a group to follow takes very little time.

Costs: Twitter is free to use for both students and educators.

Teaching & Learning: Affords teachers with an invaluable assessment tool which could be used formally throughout the learning process.  Feedback could be provided to peers in a quick and concise manner.  Affords learning opportunities which address reliability and accuracy within media literacy.

Interactivity: Very successful at creating an online community environment.  Affords both synchronous and asynchronous learning opportunities.

Organization: Prior to the use of a Twitter account, certain protocol would have to be addressed, garnering parental consent to use in the classroom being the most important first step.  Second, students would have to become well versed in their digital citizenship and net etiquette skills.  A classroom account can be set up through the teacher.

Novelty: As with watching any pre teen or teenager and their mobile device, novelty is not going to be an issue as long as the learning opportunities afford unique and creative ways to use Twitter.  However, as the changing landscape of digital technology tools multiplies and ¨better¨ and more ¨unique¨ social media opportunities arise, I wonder how long Twitter would remain novel in the eyes of a teenager.

Security, Speed, Sustainability: Security can and should be addressed first.  Having parental consent (as mentioned above) is integral to its use.  Speed in which the tool can be used, would only be hampered through poor infrastructure or lack of devices.

3. When you select media tools for your instruction, what criteria do you follow?

SECTIONS is most definitely one of the main criteria that I follow when selecting any form of media tool.  In particular, when working with students in Grade 6/7, I look to ease of use, cost, and interactivity in my selection.  I encourage active collaboration and feedback between my students as they develop their own personal learning networks.  I also look to the pedagogical values and whether there is active engagement with the tool (I guess this would address the novelty).

1. What is your opinion about the use of Twitter in instruction? Support your reasoning with examples and/or arguments.

If utilized in an educationally sound manner, Twitter in my opinion is a great tool for instruction.  As November & Mull (2012) suggest, Twitter enables the learner to tap into a wealth of knowledge, create connections with material and others, and address real-world problems in real time (one of the cornerstones of creating a digitally literate 21st century learner in my mind).  I believe that Twitter is a very strong tool that can be used in the course of instruction, as long as the creation of activities is authentic and engaging.

Throughout the course of assignment 2, I feel as though I learned of the importance in the Backward Design Model that Wiggins & McTighe (2004) suggest in putting the learner first.  I have found in the past with the constraints of the curriculum and the “must cover all aspects of the learning outcomes” centralizes a focus on completing this task as fast as possible to ensure that you cover everything.  In British Columbia as a Grade 6/7 Teacher, there are far too many outcomes for one teacher to cover over the course of the year.  As a result, one must be very selective of how they will do their very best to incorporate all of the outcomes into their teaching.  Wiggins & McTighe (2004) have also given me the opportunity to assess how I as the teacher effectively deliver my lessons and whether I am focusing more on the teaching aspect then the learning aspect.  Thinking with the end in mind first certainly makes more sense in terms of delivering lessons that focus more on the learning then the teaching.

In thinking of the collaborative process that Assignment 2 has afforded, I am reminded of the successes that I see in the collaborative process between my students and I over the course of the year.  My partner for this assignment was as I am, very reflective on the process, and this is something that I work hard at instilling in my students throughout the course of the year.  Reflective learners in my eyes are the ones who will be most receptive to the challenges they will face as 21st century learners.

Overall, I have found the learning that has gone on for myself throughout this assignment to be very rewarding and I have become more reflective of my best practices as a teacher and the need to be learner, knowledge, assessment and community centered (Anderson, 2008a) when ever I design interactions between myself and my students.

1. What looks problematic to you in this case?

Trinh faces a variety of challenges within this case.  The most problematic challenge that appears is the communication issue.  Trinh has far to many methods for students to communicate with her.  As others have already suggested forwarding options that send all communication to one specific email would make a world of difference.  When I think back to my first looks at technology integration and communication formats, I had multiple methods of students communicating with me.  There were numerous instances where I missed communication be it from parents (I teach Elementary) or from students who were seeking support.  Since these times, I have all communication formats funnelled to my work email.  My students can send messages through the GEDU accounts or can access the class blog to send a message to me.  Either way, I receive them in my work email, ensuring I am able to respond as soon as possible.

A second challenge that Trinh faces is the learner centered approach that she looks to establish in her instructional methods.  I have had numerous discussions within our school district with our distance education educators and they say that the number one challenge they face is the asynchronous environment that can be online learning.  While I can see the challenges that they face in our district, I can imagine that Trinh would see this as even more challenging given the time zone differences and the language barriers that may exist given the wide range of countries who have students enrolled.

A third challenge is the neglect on the part of the university to adequately fund the the course with either a teaching assistant or another instructor.  Add to this the 150 students who may require her support in one way, shape, or manner over the course of the week, and one might argue that Trinh is going to feel overwhelmed with the workload.  I wonder if Trinh feels pressure to teach the course given that it would cover half of her annual teaching workload for the year.  In a research based university, she might see this as an opportunity to have more time to conduct her research, and the university might see it as a bit of a ‘dangled carrot’.

2. Who are the stakeholders in this case, what has been done and what has not been done well by some of them?

I think that the stakeholders in this case are the university, the instructor, and her students, although I think that this might be in the wrong order.  Are the students learning needs being put at the forefront in this case?  I would argue that they are secondary to the university’s lack of funding in place of a large cohort of students under the tutelage of an overworked instructor.  Simply put, the university needs to properly provide the support that Trinh would need to keep up with the synchronous and asynchronous demand that would be felt in a course of this size.

3. What you think Trinh should do differently to avoid getting in situation like this?

Trinh as the leader in the course and the one who is not only delivering content and providing feedback to her students needs to step up and set up some expectations that she would have of the university providing the ability to deliver the course in a manageable manner.

4. What has to be done and by whom, so that Trinh could again be able teaching her course using learner centered instruction methods?

First, the university needs to step up and adequately provide for the needs of the instructor in this course.  Secondly, is there a better management system that is available to Trinh that will afford her with a single space for communication and opportunities for greater ease in asynchronous learning opportunities.

1. Are there other methods that are equally as economical, particularly in terms of instructor time, that are more suitable for assessment in a digital age? For instance, do you think automated essay grading is a viable alternative?

When looking to develop units and lessons in my classroom, one of the biggest challenges in teaching elementary school aged children in Grade 6/7 is the sheer volume of assignments that could possibly be suitable for assessment.  I learned very early in my career that trying to assess every possible assigned piece of work in a class of 30 teaching in 10 different subject areas was not possible.  Certainly, you could try to assess every assignment given to your students, but then one would have to question the validity of the assessment, time spent in the formal assessment process, and ultimately whether the learner is getting anything out of the feedback given, which more than likely would be very minimalistic and probably lacking detail and depth.  As I have evolved in my assessment practice with students, I have been quick to develop the skills necessary for students to peer and self assess their work.  Giving students criteria at the outset of an assignment and quelling the question ¨will this be marked¨ right away gives students a sense of ease in that they know the expectations from the outset.  I also spend a large amount of teaching about how to peer and self assess, critique and ultimately provide both meaningful and authentic feedback.

Once these skills have been taught, practiced and debated at length, we utilize these skills in looking at student work well before it makes its way to me.  For example, in our creative writing unit, students follow the following procedures:

1. brainstorming around possible ideas for a chosen topic (through the use of a collaborative google document).
2. planning and drafting of their creative writing piece in a google document
3. first draft is edited by a peer providing formative assessment utilizing criteria from Adrienne Gear’s Writing Power (3,2,1 Check it)  – This edit and revision stage is a critique done in a different colour so that I may differentiate and help support those students who require further direction around proper critique and revision.
4. second draft is written and again given the same treatment as the first draft.
5. criteria is added to the end of the final draft document where a peer and self assessment occurs
6. this process enables the students to work together in collaboration throughout and gives me an opportunity to support students as well.
7. making the assessment process authentic, I give weight to both peer and self assessment in my final assessment of the process and the product.

2. Would it be helpful to think about assessment right at the start of course planning, rather than at the end? Is this feasible?

It is vital to begin with the end in mind as the backward design model suggests.  Thinking about assessment needs to occur as educators are looking at the learning that is to occur against the learning outcomes that are prescribed by their local education boards.  Think about assessment to start enables educators to think about the process of how they will get the that end goal rather than a central focus on how do we get there and then what do we assess.  When educators and students are assessment oriented to start, it gives that sense of authenticity that helps create the critical thinking thought processes of 21st century learning.  It also enables a sense of ease in the eyes of students as it answers the questions of what and why we are doing what we are doing.

Anderson (2008a) distinguishes effective learning attributes using learning focus as a criteria. He gives four ideal types: learner-centered, knowledge centered, assessment centered, community centered.

1. What are some of the examples from your teaching experience, which fit the Anderson’s learning attributes?

Andersons’ four attributes of learning (Learner, Knowledge, Assessment, and Community centered) approach creates an idealistic model for educators in the technology driven 21st century (Anderson, 2008a).  Within my own classroom, given the multiple affordances and access to technology in my class, I tend to see myself using examples that promote ideas of connectivism in learning in that ¨learning is about making connections with ideas, facts, people, and communities¨” (Anderson, 2008a, p. 49).  As such, I work to create inquiry and project based learning opportunities as often as possible for my students.  Through the construction of meaning in a collaborative manner, I try to generate a community of inquiry within my classroom (Anderson, 2008a).  Recently, I have taken on Genius Hour as an opportunity for my students to practice within the realms of the learner and knowledge centered approaches that Anderson discusses.  Finally, an area that I am in the process of further developing surrounds the assessment centered approach.  While I provide opportunities for student to be reflective and engage in peer and self assessment, I am still working with the students to access all of the available affordances that technology offers students in this regard.

2. How well this classification reflects your learning experience with the interactions organized for educational purposes?

Anderson does a great job discussing the idea of interactivity and its relevance to students development within a community of learning.  I give students opportunities to take control of their learning, and generating mindfulness in in their learning.  Mindfulness has become a very powerful tool within my classroom, as I often address my students in their learning to be mindful of the purpose and process.  For example, when collaborating with peers, the first words to my students is to be mindful of how the process of working in collaboration will work for them.  I have found that this enables them to be reflective of their interactions prior to taking part in them.  The result I see is very focused and enthusiastic collaboration opportunities taking place.

3. What are some examples of the digital tools that are conducive to the Andersons’ classification types?

There is a wide variety of digital tools that are conducive to Andersons’ classification types.  I believe it is important to look at Andersons’ (2008a) six types of educational interaction when developing lessons that incorperate technology and digital tools.  One example that I use that students seem to have adopted and are very authentic in using is the ability to promote student to student interaction through google docs.  Students enjoy providing feedback in an asynchronous manner for their peers and are critical around their own works when given the feedback from their peers.  These documents also enable a greater variation in student-teacher interaction and as such, I have seen a much greater learner commitment and participation (Anderson, 2008a).

4. What digital tools you never implement in your instruction and would not recommend for educational use? What are the reasons for this?

I am quite positive that there are many digital tools out there that I would not recommend on the basis of them not actively offering affordances that support Andersons’ learning attributes.  However, I am of the mind that I will evaluate and assess a digital tool for the affordances.  I think it is important to try out as many of the digital tools available and assess whether they address the nature of the learning.  One of the best ways to see whether a digital tool is educationally sound is to work with your students to analyze and critique the affordances that they offer in the learning process.  For example, my students this year enjoyed creating animated videos.  We researched platforms that afforded students with opportunities to engage in the learning process.  Once we found platforms, students worked in groups to collaborate and build an animated video around a given topic.  Once the process was given due cause, we looked at the tool and critically analyzed it for its ability to address many of Andersons’ learning attributes and interaction abilities.  They then presented and debated the affordances of each tool.  If not for the process though this and the learning that we all (Students and Teacher) did together, I do not believe we would have discovered that one tool addressed our needs better than another.  This also enabled the students to develop their critical thinking skills, which of course was an added bonus.

Reference

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. (PDF)