Option 1: Learning experience, skills development and knowledge construction
As I began the course, ETEC565A, I had the following goals:
- Accommodate what I learn and apply it to my teaching situation.
- Explore and evaluate various learning management systems.
- Improve my knowledge of designing learning environments using an LMS.
The course allowed me to work both collaboratively and individually to achieve these goals, and I believe there was progress made on all 3 of them. The use of the e-portfolio allowed me practice using the WordPress site. UBC uses Connect. I contributed to the wiki page. I worked with a group to evaluate the affordances of Moodle, and I created my educational module in Eliademy. I would say that I was able to get some experience with several different LMS platforms, although I spent the most time exploring Eliademy and practicing with its tools so I feel more confident in the use of that platform.
In creating the educational module, I was able to try a new presentation software, Emaze. Asking us to produce and post a digital artifact was another good opportunity to explore a new tool. I found Emaze easy to use and I like the engaging templates it offers. I was able to create a presentation to use as part of my content module. In using a tool to create a digital artifact, it is much easier to discover what is available and what is missing, rather than random exploration of a site. The creation of the artifact is the goal, but the process of achieving the goal is where the learning happens. Putting learning into a context makes it more meaningful, and the creation of my Emaze presentation was a good example of that principle. Emaze is new, and there is no ability yet to create a voice over on the slides, nor can it be embedded into Eliademy; however, the simplicity of new tools like Eliademy and Emaze make them much easier to use compared with the more established platforms like Moodle, which is not very user friendly, in that it is not always easy to find how to edit features of the site.
The collaborative assignment was useful in that it sparked good discussion about the affordances of different LMS platforms. Group members suggested ideas that I had not thought of, and therefore I believe we created a more comprehensive, thorough evaluation of Moodle than if I had worked by myself.
One of the big ideas that I have come away with is that when designing an online learning environment, fewer clicks are better. As a student, the number of clicks it takes to get to a discussion thread on Connect frustrates me. This reduces my motivation to participate and becomes even more frustrating when traveling (as I was this summer) and trying to use the, sometimes, unreliable internet at a hotel. Simplifying this was a feature I tried to implement in my introductory and content modules. Where possible, I embedded images and videos. I added links to different pages on the LMS so students wouldn’t have to scroll as much. If I could have added sub-menus I would have done that as well. These small design features can make a difference in the experience of the student user. Our learning is affected by our emotions and I want students to spend time thinking about the content, not getting frustrated with the delivery platform.
I appreciate that the course allowed me an opportunity to experience several LMS platforms. I’m also aware that the ongoing purposeful reflective process of posting on our portfolio page was helpful along the way, and is helpful in completing this synthesis. I had forgotten about some of the skills I learned and experiences I had until I went back and re-read my home page posts. I like to try new things, which is why I decided to create my content module on Eliademy. My school uses Moodle, and this would have been a good opportunity to enhance my use of Moodle in my school; however, I came into the MET program to be introduced to new tools. Now that I have a better understanding of elements of designing an online course, I can go and interact with Moodle, and I will continue to use Eliademy as well. In fact, I have already spoken to our tech department about it and will be running a mini-tutorial about it in a few weeks time.
The reading materials were helpful. I had read a couple of the articles in previous classes (Anderson’s 4 Attributes of Learning, for one) but going back and re-reading these helped solidify the need to create assessment, learner, community, and knowledge-centered environments (Anderson, 2008a). In addition, the readings gave me a focus for designing my online course, and for choosing the right digital tools, using the SECTIONS model (Bates, 2014). I appreciate that the readings were centered on important aspects of online course delivery such as choosing the right media, how social media tools can be used effectively, and issues of privacy and copyright. The discussion questions were meant to help us reflect on the readings in a collaborative environment, and I value being part of those discussions. While the discussions sometimes feel forced, I do believe they are necessary to push students forward in their learning process.
The reading that resonated with me most, and really helped me shape my content module was the Gibbs & Simpson article related to assessment (2005). I work in a grade-centered school, and it was a refreshing reminder of the difference between grades and feedback, the types and importance of feedback, and how assessment can and should be used to support learning. I want to create my classroom environment to be assessment-centered, not grade-centered. Feedback-centered, not judgment-centered. My goal moving forward is to get better at this.
The different platforms used to deliver the course offered benefits and limitations. I liked the design of the WordPress site. The drop down menus made the site very easy to navigate. If WordPress had an option for discussion I would prefer that as an option, although the site could be “spruced up” with a little more color and relevant images. Opening two sites (Connect and WordPress) and clicking back and forth felt cumbersome at times. If Connect offers the ability to have drop-down menus, I would suggest keeping everything in Connect. If WordPress develops a discussion tool, then move over to WordPress. As I mentioned earlier, fewer clicks makes the experience for a user to be centered on the learning, not the technology. I’m not sure the wiki collaboration tool offered much to the course delivery, other than showing us another tool. It felt hidden amongst the Connect site and not everyone contributed to it. Even when I contributed, I wasn’t entirely sure as to the purpose of using it, it took a few minutes to find it, and because it was not embedded within the discussion posts, I did not go back and look at it. Again, the problem of too many clicks affected my motivation to use the tool.
Overall, I come away from this course with a more solid understanding of learning management systems and affordances and limitations of using them to deliver an online course. I have had the opportunity to reflect on how I design online learning environments, both from a pedagogical and aesthetic point of view, which will shape how I structure online content in the future. I also came away with the beginning of an online course, which I will use in the future.
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.
Bates, T. (2014). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning. Retrieved from http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/part/9-pedagogical-differences-between-media/
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2005). Conditions under which assessment supports student learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 3-31.