Engaging Online Learners

Static versus Dynamic Technolgies

When I reflect on my position within the "static-dynamic continuum," I find that I currently relate more to the static and middle position.  I find that these are the technologies I currently utilize because they are the tools and concepts that I'm familiar with already.  Many of the dynamic tools, I have never been exposed to or even heard of.  It would require personal research and professional development opportunities in order for me to feel comfortable with using these technologies with my students.  I would never want to be in the position where both my students and I am confused on how to effectively use tool in order to gain knowledge.  I am very interested in utilizing mindtools, especially some of the ones mentioned by Jonassen, et. al (1998) and also problem-based learning.

Resources:

Jonassen, D., Carr, C., & Yueh, H. (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in critical thinking. TechTrends, 43(2), 24-32.

McGreal R. & Elliott, M. (2008). Technologies of online learning (E-learning). In Anderson, T. (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed.) (p. 440-472). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Moller, L. (2008). Static and dynamic technological tools. [Unpublished Paper].

  

Blogs on Static vs. Dynamic Technologies I Found Most Interesting:

• Christine Moore - http://edtech-school.blogspot.com/
• Aderonke Bello - http://baedutech.blogspot.com/

Engaging Learners with New Strategies and Tools

          When learners leisurely use the Internet, they have many outlets for exploring content, communicating with others, and also collaborating as well.  More and more learners are reading personal blogs, viewing videos, and podcasts to enlighten them about the world around them.  Sites such as YouTube allow them to readily find how-to videos, as well as lectures, presentations, and instructional videos.  YouTube can also be a way for them to communicate their ideas as well.  Many learners, you will find, have a blog or at least some social media account that allows them to express their ideas and thoughts.  Learners are also communicating through the use of video conferencing with software such as Skpye, Tango, and ooVoo.  They are able to reach across great distances to have conversations with friends and family who may be clear across the globe.  These tools can also be used to help them collaborate with those friends and family members as they have synchronous conversations.  They are also collaborating by sharing documents using outlets such as Google Docs. 

            All of these tools can be used within the classroom as well.  Students can still enhance their content knowledge by accessing blogs created by professionals within that specific content area.  They can also use sites such as YouTube and TED to access presentations and lectures as well.  Students can then in turn create their own blogs (Blogger, Word Press) to demonstrate their learning outside of merely participating in discussion forums.  Then finally, when working in small groups, students can use wikis (Wikispaces) and video conferencing software to collaborate on assignments and projects.  By utilizing technological tools that today’s learners are familiar with, it helps to ease apprehension about learning versus directing them to a site or program that they have little experience with. 

Assessing Collaborative Efforts

Before the course begins, the instructor should not assume that his or her learners possess the appropriate learning strategies, knowledge, and the attitude necessary to successfully navigate within a collaborative learning community.  As George Siemens (Laureate, 2008) identifies that “in a society where individual contributions are highly acknowledged, collaboration learning communities can be challenged for many students,” as it represents a loss of self.  Many students who’ve reveled in individualized recognition may not understand how to operate within collaborative environment and still excel.    With this in mind, the instructor must create a trusting environment for individuals to work within.  To help ease the unsure of those reluctant learners, educators must create a mix of individualized and community-based environments (Siemens, 2008).   Palloff and Pratt (2005) suggest that instructors set the stage for collaboration by providing: (1) an explanation of the importance of collaborative work, (2) clear guidelines for completing the work, (3) an agenda and instructions for the activities; and (4) ensuring that students are comfortable with the technology in use.  The instructor must also create an environment for students to meet, complete work and determine what the “rules of engagement” might be.  Instructors must then model, guide and evaluate the process (Palloff & Pratt, 2005).

            Assessment (evaluation) of the collaborative process should be fair and direct, based on stated outcomes, and equitable (Laureate, 2008).  As the vision of education has broadened beyond a classroom confined experience, so has assessment broadened beyond mark-based assessment and should find basis in degree of student growth and within authentic assessment (Laureate, 2008).  Palloff and Pratt (2005) note several principles to guide student assessment: “design learner-centered assessments that include self-reflection; design and include grading rubrics, include collaborative assessments;  provide guidelines  and model good feeback; use assessment techniques that fit in context and align with learning objectives; design assessments that are clear, easy to understand, and likely to work in the online environment; and ask for and incorporate student input.  This helps to provide a road map for students as they work through the collaborative tasks.  This is especially important for those reluctant to collaborate.  Andrew Marcinek, an instructional technologist at Burlington High School in Burlington, MA, shares some of the principles for collaborative assessment as Palloff and Pratt.  He finds that when assessing, instructors should (1) Set clear objectives and tasks;  (2) Allow for open collaboration; (3) Allow access to learning tools; (4) Limit explicit direction; and (5): Define clear expectations (Marcinek, 2011). 

Marcinek and Siemens both understand that collaboration is skill that must be addressed within education today in order for learners to be successful in the global society in which we now live. 

“Collaborative assessment must be part of our learning today. We, as educators are doing our students a disservice if we don’t attempt to make this type of assessment available to our students. There are few professions and work environments that only focus on individual competencies. Most modern work environments involve some type of collaboration or connected problem solving to enhance their corporation or product” (Marcinek, 2011). 

With the previous mentioned methods, those reluctant to collaboration may find themselves more apt to participate and eventually become more comfortable as their entire sense of self will not be lost as they may at first expect.  Continuous self assessment and collaborative feedback keeps them constantly involved in the collaborative community. 

“The more we engage our students in a process of ongoing evaluation of their own performance, the more meaningful the online course will be to them.  The more we engage them in working with one another in both collaborative activity and collaborative assessment, the more likely they are to engage in a learning community that will sustain them beyond the end of the course” (Palloff & Pratt, 2005, p. 53). 

Throughout this entire process, the instructor should be closely monitoring what is happening with learning individually and collaboratively.  If a learner is still reluctant to participate within the collaborative learning community, the instructor must address the issue and determine what needs to be done in order to insure that learner receives the support he or she needs in order to be successful.

Resources:

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2008). (n.d.).  Assessment of collaboration learning.  [Video Production]. Available from https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_968211_1%26url%3D

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2008). (n.d.).  Learning communities.  [Video Production]. Available from https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_968211_1%26url%3D

Marcinek, A. (2011, February 16). Importance of collaborative assessment in a 21st century classroom.  [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/collaborative-assessment-digital-classroom-social-media-tools

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online: Learning together in community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Distance Education: Learner Engagement Storyboard

Here is a very rough draft of the elements I plan to address within my video presentation.
https://docs.google.com/presentation/pub?id=1sf1hyh4QHXmcs2dutPl4nJMA0S5_PEVnKI0pjEEtLB0&start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000

Distance Education and Collaborative Interaction

                Dr. George Siemens discussed how global diversity, communication, and collaborative interaction have all contributed to the growing acceptance of distance education in today's society - corporately and educationally.  I particularly want to focus on collaborative interaction.  Coming from an education background, sometimes it is hard for me to relate to how distance education has vastly improved collaborating.  This is something that I have always had to participate in my face-to-face classes and have been pushed to incorporate into my own classroom so it is not a foreign concept.              

                However, online tools have provided us the ability to collaborate without always being near one another, which is a major convenience.  We are now able to share ideas asynchronously and synchronously.  Micah, high school teacher and adjunct professor, (http://minerclass.edublogs.org/2010/12/31/collaborative-interaction-in-distance-education%E2%80%A6/) is a proponent for the use of the wiki as a way to further create a culture of collaboration, a skill learners will need in order to survive in global competition.   Maria Dolores (http://mariadoloresjardim.blogspot.com/2011/03/collaborative-interaction.html) also believes that collaborative interaction is important to distance education.  Like Micah, she mentions the use of wikis but also Google docs, video-and web- conferencing.  These tools help to keeps us connected 24 hours a day, 7 days a week with our colleagues and fellow learners.  With face-to-face education, you only have the set times that you agree to meet to share your ideas.  Online tools help to alleviate that disconnect.

Resources:

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2008). (n.d.).  The future of distance education.  [Video Production]. Available from https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_968211_1%26url%3D

Dolores, M. (2011, March 30). Collaborative interaction. [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://mariadoloresjardim.blogspot.com/2011/03/collaborative-interaction.html

Minerclass. (2011, December 31). Collaborative interaction in distance education. [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://minerclass.edublogs.org/2010/12/31/collaborative-interaction-in-distance-education%E2%80%A6/

The Next Generation of Distance Education (EDUC 7102, M-1)

• The Evolution of Distance Education: Implications for Instructional Design on the Potential of the Web (Part 1: Training and Development)
• The Evolution of Distance Education: Implications for Instructional Design on the Potential of the Web (Part 2: Higher Education)
• The Evolution of Distance Education: Implications for Instructional Design on the Potential of the Web (Part 3: K-12)
• Making decisions: The use of electronic technology in online classrooms
• Distance Education: The Next Barrier/Equivalency Theory

The central theme from the articles and video programs is that distance education cannot be handled like the traditional face-to-face education setting.  Michael Simonson explains his equivalency theory stating that distance education is not identical to  face-to-face education, but is equivalent.  It should have the same learning outcomes and provide equivalent learning experiences to meet those outcomes.  Distance education has grown quickly and according to Simonson (Laureate, 2008), its exponential growth will continue.  With that, in order to insure its success,  "It is important to employ a variety of technologies to help students achieve learning outcomes.  Equivalency is achieved through a variety of learning experiences that are tailored to the environment and situation in which students find themselves" (Simonson, 2000).  Moller, Huett, Foshay, and Coleman (2008) address the demands of distance education by advocating the strong involvement of instructional designers within the development of instruction.  Instructional design has an impact on quality of instruction and appropriate training and support for faculty and staff involved in distance education.  A shift has to occur to employ strong instructional design at the forefront of distance education and weave it throughout its entire infrastructure from the concepts of funding, policy, K-12 classrooms, and higher education.


I agree with the authors that the accelerated growth of distance education calls for a greater quality of learning.  People have multiple options when choosing a distance education program.  A shift from quantity to quality needs to occur in order to insure the success of the field.  With that, the design of the materials/lessons must be conducive to learning in an online environment.  Face-to-face concepts cannot carry over to distance education.  This understanding alone can have a tremendous affect on students and educators perceptions of distance education.

References

Huett, J., Moller, L., Foshay, W. R., & Coleman, C. (2008). The Evolution of Distance Education: Implications for Instructional Design on the Potential of the Web. Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice To Improve Learning, 52(5), 63-67. doi:10.1007/s11528-008-0199-9

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2008). (n.d.).  Distance education: The next barrier.  [Video Production]. Available from https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_968211_1%26url%3D

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2008). (n.d.).  Equivalency theory.  [Video Production]. Available from https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_968211_1%26url%3D

Moller, L., Forshay, W. R., & Huett, J. (2008). The Evolution of Distance Education: Implications for Instructional Design on the Potential of the Web. Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice To Improve Learning, 52(3), 70-75. doi:10.1007/s11528-008-0158-5

Moller, L., Foshay, W. R., & Huett, J. (2008). The Evolution of Distance Education: Implications for Instructional Design on the Potential of the Web. Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice To Improve Learning, 52(4), 66-70. doi:10.1007/s11528-008-0179-0

Simonson, M. (2000). Making decisions: The use of electronic technology in online classrooms. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 84, 29–34.