6) Synthesis

ETEC 565 Course Synthesis

Precis of Flight Path

When I began this course there was four technologies that I wanted to explore to help me in my career: document cameras, multiple LCD projectors, RSS feeds and LMS choices.  The main reason for wanting some more knowledge on each of these was the fact that they were current decisions that the technology committee at my school were faced with.  Throughout the course, we actively engaged with two of these technologies, RSS feeds and LMS sites, and I was able to use readings from the course to secure a third, document cameras, in my own classroom.

One of the decisions that weighed on my mind at the beginning of the course was choosing the right LMS for our school.  Currently we have an in-house Intranet that was written by our technology department and is satisfactory.  This spring we decided to review how it is used and decide if it needed an upgrade.  I was happy to encounter the SECTIONS model (Bates & Poole, 2003) to help guide our decision as it really focused on many of the things we were concerned with such as speed, ease of use and cost, but also got us to think about a few other considerations such as the novelty and organizational issues.  As a boarding school we had several organizational issues that other schools did not face.  Moreover, we did not want to have any “buyers remorse” (Panettieri, 2007) by opting for an entirely new LMS that was underused by our teachers as many other institutions have faced.

Moreover, I have found that RSS feeds can be a great tool to track my students’ submission of work or blog posts.  I have assigned my students blogs for homework for many years, but always followed the blog regularly to know who posted.  However, with the addition of a RSS feed I can monitor my students’ submissions more efficiently and in a more timely manner (Chickering & Ehrmann, 1996).  I was able to experience this firsthand as a student in this course, when I had my blog posts responded to almost immediately by Dr. Egan.

Reflections on E-Learning Tool Kit

The E-Learning tool kit ended up being one my favourite parts of this course.  Some of the tools I had used before and had a lot to reflect about.  For instance, social media is something I am a strong proponent of and actively use in my classes.  Nonetheless, I enjoyed the discussions that ensued about privacy issues and also comparing the terms of use between the various social networks.

Synchronous communication tools ended up being a very surprising part of this course.  While we have a primitive form of synchronous communication in the chat function on our school’s Intranet, I have always felt that this is an area we could improve our LMS.  The introduction of Wimba was a neat alternative as was the chat functions on Moodle, both of which were new to me.  Furthermore, I continued to experiment with Skype and the chat function on Google Docs in the group work that was done in this course.

The mobile learning section of the tool kit was rather unproductive for me.  The two factors that prevented me from really embracing mobile learning for designing courses are the screen size and keyboard size.  While both of these limitations are dealt with in the new slates, they usually require the addition of a keyboard, which makes them less mobile.  My conclusion on mobile devices is that they are great for viewing content and participating in synchronous communication, but that they are limited in their ability to be good design tools.

The use of the web log to create an E-Portfolio to submit work in this course was a great idea.  I still prefer to use Weebly versus Word Press, but it was a good experience to showcase assignments and reflections in this way.  I also had an interesting experience when I realized that I was not using the web log to the best of my abilities and was not even making the smallest requirements that I expect of my own students!

Using the wiki to complete a class assignment became much clearer to me after doing it in this course.  I had used wikis in the past, but had never used the discussion function quite as effectively as we did as a group.  While I still prefer threaded discussions, I can see how this tool might work well in smaller group projects.  As well, I recognized the need establish guidelines for posting and attribution so that the wiki does not get too cluttered or disorganized.  I have also seen the need for this in shared documents like Google Docs.

DVD authoring is something that I had felt was a dying art until the discussion we had in this course.  I am still not convinced that DVD’s are necessarily going to survive; however, the fundamentals behind this can still be created in other online sites and distributed through sites like YouTube.  Nonetheless, I had to be careful not to forget that Internet access is not a worldwide privilege yet and that in some remote communities DVD’s are the most likely solution to conducting a course.

Accessibility was the part of the tool kit that was most intriguing.  The Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) was a great resource when creating web sites.  I have tried to keep this in mind when building my Moodle site so that it can be accessed by assistive technologies and is not limiting for people with disabilities.  In particular, I was careful about the choice of colour so that it would not convey meaning or be difficult for colour blind (WAI, 2011).

Finally, perusing the various LMS options was extremely valuable.  In particular, I enjoyed comparing Web CT/Vista, Moodle and Claroline and our work with Moodle, although I am not sure I agree that Moodle is “quite intuitive” (Perkins and Pfaffman, 2006).  In conclusion, the three things that I now feel we need to improve upon in our own Intranet LMS is synchronous tools, embedded testing and threaded blogs or forums.

Overall Experience

My overall experience has been quite good in this course.  I have felt that it has been more work than any of the other nine courses I have taken in the MET program, but that I have pushed my boundaries and been exposed to and learned a lot.  The building of the Moodle site has been a very good experience in designing a course.  The various steps in deciding which LMS to use have been useful on a practical level as I have taken this knowledge and applied it to a decision in my professional life.  Moreover, the interaction with my peers in this course has been outstanding.  In particular, I have found the various case studies to be an outstanding way to generate discussion.  I found the cases to be realistic and, in many cases, similar to ones I have faced at my own school.

Next Steps For Me

As this is my last course in the MET program my next steps are all geared toward my professional life.  In my role as chairman of the technology committee I will use this experience to help in the decision making of my committee and the administration of the school.  Too often I am asked to make decisions based on certain technologies and not enough about the pedagogy that is required to use these technologies.  Therefore, one my main focuses after this course will be to try and have my school ask the questions in the SECTIONS model (Bates & Poole, 2003) before we move to the next step of asking what devices we want.  Beyond that I hope that we can begin to ask the three questions laid out in Module 5:

1)  What will is add to the learner’s experience?

2)  What resources will it require, including funds time and equipment?

3)  What would be an alternative if the original artifact proves problematic?

In terms of my role as a history teacher, I am going to change a few things in how I use technology in the classroom.  I have appreciated the assessment unit in this course, and its focus on various assessment methods.  In particular, I wanted to assess in ways that would reward student’s effort as much as their retention (Gibbs & Simpson, 2005).  I think that the options in Moodle are very good at this and will be suggesting something similar be added to our class pages of our own Intranet.  Moreover, I have found many new ways to share information in an online setting.  I will be transferring all of my saved files to online sites over the coming year and begin to embed these html documents onto our own site.  While I fear that creating graphic user interfaces (GUIs) will continue to be a struggle for me, I think I will make this a challenge of mine moving forward to become better at this part of course design rather than always relying on others to do it for me.

Finally, as I had mentioned in my flight plan, I was interested in trying out document cameras and multiple projectors.  I am happy to say that I was able to get a demo of the Elmo document camera and have convinced our administration of its value in the classroom.  We will be starting next year with three of them and one will be in my room.  Furthermore, while I was successful in convincing my administration of the value of having multiple projectors for group work in the classroom, the budget did not allow for that expenditure this year.  Nonetheless, it is now on the radar for next year’s budget.

References

Bates, A.W. & Poole, G. (2003). Chapter 4: a Framework for Selecting and Using Technology. In Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education: Foundations for Success. (pp. 77-105). San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.

Chickering, A.W. & Ehrmann, S.C. (1996).  Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever.  American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 49(2), 3-6.

Gibbs, G. and Simpson, C. (2005).  “Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning.” Learning and Teaching in Higher Education Accessed online 11 March 2009 http://www.open.ac.uk/fast/pdfs/Gibbs%20and%20Simpson%202004-05.pdf

Panettieri, J. (2007). Addition by subtraction. University Business, August, 58-62. Accessed online 11 March 2009 http://www.universitybusiness.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=845

Perkins, M., & Pfaffman, J. (2006). Using a Course Management System to Improve Classroom Communication. Science Teacher , 73 (7), 33-37.

WAI. (2011). Web accesibility initiative. Retrieved from http://www.w3.org/WAI/