Website

In the weeks leading up to Group 5’s presentation there were some feelings of stress relating to the two issues.  First, other groups had set the bar quite high in terms of quality and quantity of output in their symposium presentations.  Secondly, the nature of our topic was a bit different from others in that the topic was more wide open and flexible.  This led to some early postings in our discussion forum on what the intended goals would be for the presentation, and the expressed concern for not leaving things too late.

In order to start visualizing and conceptualizing how the presentation might look, a mock-up of a presentation was created using the content management system (CMS) Joomla.  At the same time, there were continuing discussions on what the topics for the presentation should be and how it could be presented.  Members noted and agreed that visuals and interactivity should be a big part of the presentation .  After this phase of the project was complete, the group work quieted down in order to attend to other assignments and life related matters, as well as to allow each member to become acquainted with the material and readings for the unit.  The limits of asynchronous communication through the discussion forum also started to show.  It was not clear to members if everyone was reading each posting, or if individual responses were needed for each posting.  There was some frustration in the ability for people to commit to any of the outstanding questions on format or content.  It is difficult to say if this was due to inattention, lack of authority, lack of confidence, etc, in team members.  It is likely that multiple issues contributed to the indecisiveness.  A turning point in the project was the creation of a shared document in Google docs.  Used as a shared sketchpad for ideas and thoughts, this proved to be an invaluable tool for developing the presentation (and the group thought question, which was happening at the same time ).

Once we were closer to the due date, the group dramatically increased its productivity and attention to the presentation.  One member instigated the division of tasks and this helped get everyone actively involved in collaboration.  A timetable was created which identified key tasks and interim due dates, and team members volunteered/chose the topics that they wanted to work on for the presentation.  However, there was still some indecisiveness in choosing a presentation format.  This issue likely could have been addressed most efficiently through a group chat (synchronous) session.  However, individual schedules and wildly different time zones made this very difficult to coordinate.  At this point, team members had two different approaches to choosing a format.  One was to gather all the content together and then put it into the webpage/presentation.  The other approach was to have the format chosen so that the content would be created in situ.  If a chat session had been conducted, these two approaches could have been clarified and the group would likely have worked a bit more efficiently .

Having said this, there was a feeling that the group was now well coordinated and structured to achieve our goal.  The group was fortunate to have avoided any conflicts or strong disagreements, and there was obvious support for each team members’ actions and ideas.

Finally, a stronger opinion on the presentation format was expressed and the group decided to use the Joomla site.  Now that each member had their own topic and section to work on, the real work on the project began and team members loaded their content onto the site.  Multiple logons were created so that members could see what the others were working on.  Although it wasn’t explicitly identified as such, upon reflection we can see that the simultaneous content creation on a shared site was also a type of collaboration, as it allowed us to see the expectations of others through their work.  We were all clearly open to suggestions and feedback, both through the shared Google doc and through the discussion forum.

Joomla, being somewhat user-unfriendly, proved to be a challenging tool for the team members.  There were technical issues, and the individual work and difficulty in communication was frustrating and somewhat isolating.  The issue with Joomla is that it is a full-featured CMS and as such, contains some detailed security features.  One feature was stripping out html code used to embed videos and spicynodes (the <object> tag). Although there were adaptations made for this until the final solution was discovered, team members regretfully went through varying degrees of stress, thinking that content had been lost.  The experience highlighted some of the pitfalls of technology along with some of the benefits.  Elluminate sessions were used for one-on-one help with Joomla, and these were seen as an effective way to communicate and offer training or assistance.  As well, team members found that although working with Joomla was frustrating at times, it was both a worthwhile experience and a useful skill to have learned.

Feedback for the overall look and content of the presentation site was provided through the discussion forum, and offered all team members a chance to voice their opinions.  We feel that the end result is a reasonably professional and unique looking presentation with a visual appeal that all team members were satisfied with.

The addition of the Discussion Questions raised one last issue with communication.  While all team members agreed to write one discussion question based on their topic, who would enter them into the discussion forum, and how, was never discussed.  As a result, there was some confusion on the morning of the presentation as to whether or not each member was going to pose their own question, and who would write an introduction or welcoming post.  There was some discussion between team members on this, but not everyone was aware of the plan.  Upon reflection, the absence of synchronous communication was likely the biggest hurdle this group faced .

We felt that being the last group to present helped us develop better strategies for our presentation. The use of the web 2.0 tools facilitated the process through direct assistance and demonstration. There was some concern with the sign-up process though, as there was ambiguity on what the focus of our presentation was meant to be and some members were not sure on what they were signing up for.  There is a wish that better clarity was achieved earlier, as this would have allowed for more time spent on content creation while leaving only the technical issues (uploaded information) to the end.  Looking at the other groups’ presentations, we liked how some of the polls/questionnaires were used, and found the TED talk (Sugata Mitra) to offer a new and unique view on technology in education.

As an overall experience, the collation of ideas, information, skills and resources, as well as the intimate involvement in the research and development activities, made our symposium presentation a fulfilling venture resulting in diverse perspectives and a dynamic presentation. Having a team of diverse members with different skill sets, our group found this process to be a good learning experience and members appreciated the support of others in areas where help was needed.  The collaborative aspect also provided confidence and motivation for team members, and there is some regret that our group did not go through this process earlier in the course.

Danielle’s Comments:

WOW!!  You all have much to be proud of!  I can tell that a lot of time and thought was put into each portion of this presentation and you have gone above and beyond the readings for this unit!  I truly appreciate the links you have made to other learning theories covered in this course; thus extending the discussions we have covered throughout this course and really linking teaching theories with new technological theories.  BRILLIANT!!  GREAT idea with the You Tube video giving voice and life to the discussion questions!  Doug…is that you?

You have all done a great job summarizing the readings and I love the individual sections that clearly link Cognitive, Social, and Developmental Theories to technology and teaching strategies.  I am also impressed with the thought, detail, and work that you have put in with regards to presenting Web 2.0, Devices, and Distance learning.  I really appreciate the bit and the question about Evaluation.

Fantastic work!!

With regards to discussion facilitation and monitoring:  Nice work!  You all have done a very good job monitoring the discussions and even entering in discussion among yourselves as presenters!  I found this refreshing as it is often the case where 1 presenter will take responsibility for 1 question and participate infrequently in other presenters’ threads.  You all have done a great job of working together (whether this was planned or not) to facilitate and bring new thought to the threads!  Great work!!

With respect to your responses to the other Groups – nicely done!  I appreciate the time you have put in to providing encouraging feedback and thoughtful reflection.  I couldn’t find your thoughts for 64B though…

Overall you have done an EXCELLENT job with this!  I am thoroughly impressed and you all should be very proud of yourselves J

20/20