ITEducator

Blog 6 - Diversity and Globalism

2011-02-16T16:43:00.000-08:00

Supporting diversity is a method of increasing the value of technology in education. Acquiring resources and developing strategies that offer equal access for gender, cultural, and
socioeconomic diversities is a critical component of a tolerant classroom. Therefore, I search for methods and digital media to support individual differences.

Regarding gender differences, girls and boys receive alternatives to performance tasks such as selecting a digital tool for written expression. Thornburg (2010) warns that educators must address gender equity to ensure that all students have access to tools that initiate and encourage creativity. Cultural sensitivity means including culture-rich text and images to expose students to diverse traditions. Projects regarding cultural heritage as well as incorporating stories, discussions, and experts from other backgrounds helps students understand and respect different perspectives. Finally, socioeconomic status is a significant issue in my organization as the majority of students come from low income, single parent families. My responsibilities to address this need involve providing numerous multimedia opportunities to expose students to digital literacy including typing, browsing, and presenting information.

Overall, to make technology valuable, I must stay proactive in using emerging technologies to create a respectful environment where students openly experience various perspectives. Closing the digital divide requires equal access to global citizenship (Dyson, 2011). By integrating educational technology into daily routines, students connect to globalization and understand the power of the web regardless of gender, culture, or socioeconomic issues. This discovery will sustain global participation as students accept and use the opinions of others to build and share personal perspectives. In the future, I would like to incorporate the use of cell phones as experts suggest that this technology will close the digital divide (Nagel, 2011; Soloway, 2009). Until our school accepts cell phones as a learning tool, I will continue to explore the latest web-based innovations such as Google apps, wikis, and Moodle as appropriate tools for providing knowledge about technology as well as exploit authentic learning activities.

References

Dyson, L. (2011, February 15). How will gov 2.0 address the digital divide? [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://codeforamerica.org/2011/02/15/how-will-gov-2-0-address-the-digital-divide/#

Nagel, D. (2011, February 1). Will smart phones eliminate the digital divide? [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://thejournal.com/articles/2011/02/01/will-smart-phones-eliminate-the-digital-divide.aspx

Soloway, E. (2009). The digital divide: Leveling the playing field. Podcast retrieved from Laureate Education, Inc.

Thornburg, D. (Presenter). (2010). Diversity and globalism. In Emerging and Future Technology [DVD]. United States: Laureate Education, Inc.

Module 5 Discussion

2011-02-08T17:36:00.000-08:00

Obtaining digital media including video and music requires little effort and money. For a recent project, I rented “Blade Runner” using an app on my iPod Touch. Then, I connected my iPod to my home theatre system and enjoyed surround sound and HD image quality. I did not purchase or rent a DVD, because video on demand (VOD) has displaced DVD rental for my personal entertainment.

The future of the fierce competition between DVD and VOD is explained by the concept of increasing returns rather than red queens. According to Thornburg (2010), red queens describe the competition between two technologies that continually evolve to stay strong in the market. At first glance, one might argue that the battle between these two technologies exhibits red queen forces. Agreeably, these two technologies emerged at relatively the same time and continued to develop throughout time (Anderson, 2004). Yet, the current state of DVDs causes me to believe that the red queen force is no longer relevant.

Similar to red queens, increasing returns also acknowledges the fierce competition between two technologies. However, in this race, one technology ultimately takes the prize replacing the competition due to multiple outcomes including adoption of outside influences (Arthur, 1999). While DVD purchases decreased in 2010, the VOD market increased by 20% demonstrating critical mass (Graser, 2011). Outside agents including gaming systems, iTunes, smartphones, wireless internet, and TiVo are creating potential adopters due to the merge with VOD services (Tynan, 2008). DVDs began on top, however, as users gain familiarity with technologies in the digital revolution, VOD services appeal to a wider audience. Pretty soon, VOD will push out DVD and Blu-Ray. VOD offers higher efficiency, affordability, and portability. The driving force between the battle of VOD and DVD results from increasing returns due to the impact of economic influences and the predictability of the replacement of DVDs (Arthur, 1999).

Using McLuhan’s tetrad model, DVDs are located in the obsolete category, because VOD technology has replaced DVDs in many situations. Additionally, VOD represents reversal as the future of video entertainment is shifting from physical devices to digital streaming (Seals, 2011). Markets would be wise to use the tetrad model to capitalize on the video streaming and budget according to the downfall of DVDs.

References

Anderson, C. (2004). Tech’s long tail [Video]. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/chris_anderson_of_wired_on_tech_s_long_tail.html

Arthur, B. (1999). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. The Economic Journal, 99(394), 116-131. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/pss/2234208

Graser, M. (2011, January 6). Blu-ray hits mainstream in 2010: Players, discs hit critical mass in US homes [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118029848?refCatId=14&ref=related

Seals, T. (2011, January). Netflix commits DVD-OCIDE: Targets cable VOD [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://www.vision2mobile.com/news/2011/01/netflix-commits-dvd-ocide-targets-cable-vod.aspx#

Thornburg, D. (2008c). Red Queens, butterflies, and strange attractors: Imperfect lenses into emergent technologies. Lake Barrington, IL: Thornburg Center for Space Exploration.

Tynan, D. (2008). The 10 most disruptive technology combinations [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://www.pcworld.com/article/143474/the_10_most_disruptive_technology_combinations.html

Discussion 4: Second Life

2011-01-27T17:48:00.000-08:00

Disruptive technologies occur when an innovative technology combines with an existing technology to revolutionize performance (Thornburg, 2010). Tynan (2008) suggests several powerful combinations including DVR plus On Demand, You Tube plus low-priced digital camcorders, and cell phones plus wireless internet. The iPad is another debatable disruptive technology. The iPad meets the criteria of disruptive technologies such as customer demand, new applications, and limited marketing research (Christensen, 1997; Laube, 2010). Disruptive technologies change existing conditions by impacting personal management, opinion, and achievement.

Another powerful example of a disruptive technology is Second Life. According to Rosedale, (2008) people will eventually prefer virtual characters rather than their real identities. Revolutionizing social interaction and communication contributes to the debate of Second Life as a disruptive technology. This web application obsoletes previous methods of instant messaging and advances emotional involvement with personalized avatars. As a relatively new experience, Second Life will dominate web communication for many years until an advanced holographic virtual community revolutionizes human interaction predicted for 2025 (Elon University/Pew Internet Project, n.d.). Social benefits related to virtual worlds include understanding culturally diverse experiences and freely collaborating with many users (Rosedale, 2008). As interest builds, more people will immerse themselves in the virtual world to escape physical and emotional barriers. By combining the human desire to communicate with innovative virtual technology, Second Life extends existence into the imagination.

Regarding education, Second Life exploits student engagement to enhance interaction with information. The virtual world provides an authentic learning environment including interaction with experts and feedback from peers (Gronstedt, 2008). The virtual world presents obvious challenges including bullying and cynical or faulty information. Yet, Second Life applies content in authentic situations, engages multiple intelligences and learning styles, and enables expression (harveyd, 2011). The ability to discuss ideas with peers in an imaginative environment would promote knowledge transfer as students engage within a collaborative and realistic environment.
References

Christensen, C. (1997). Notes on the innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fall. Retrieved from http://www.2ndbn5thmar.com/change/The%20Innovators.pdf

Elon University/Pew Internet Project. (n.d.). Imagining the Internet: A history and forecast: Forward 150 timeline. Retrieved from http://www.elon.edu/e eb/predictions/forward150years.pdf

Gronstedt, A. (2008). Be first in second life. Training, 29-30. Retrieved from http://www.gronstedtgroup.com/pdf/Training_Mag_article_virtual_world_fall_08.pdf

harveyd. (2011, January 17). Second Life: Rita Mulholland [Web log comment]. Retrieved from
http://wp.stockton.edu/asde/2011/01/17/second-life-rita-mulholland/

Laube, S. (2010, March 3). Is the iPad a disruptive technology? [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://pwcinnovate.wordpress.com/2010/03/03/is-the-ipad-a-disruptive-technology/

Tynan, D. (2008). The 10 most disruptive technology combinations [Web log comment]. Retrieved from
http://www.pcworld.com/article/143474-10_most_disruptive_technology_combinations.html

Module 3 Blog: Rhymes of History

2011-01-11T11:14:00.001-08:00

Throughout history, storytelling is the foundation for cultural heritage, teaching, and entertainment. From oral, paintings, text, projectors slides, and video versions, storytelling shapes civilization and records the biography of humanity. Today, storytelling continues to impact past, present, and future. Yet, the nature of storytelling has adapted to the digital age through video production software and online slideshow presentations.

Animoto, a cloud computing customer, represents modern storytelling. This free web application allows users to create a digital story using images, video, and sound. Additionally, users can easily upload presentations to the web or embed in social networking sites (Dick, 2011). The many uses for these online stories include sharing classroom performance, marketing, and communication with family and friends. Passing down traditions and memoirs no longer require synchronous meetings. With the web, telling a story that reaches around the globe takes only a few minutes of editing on an online platform.

A key concern regarding Animoto involves user protection as cloud computing faces the challenge of information security threats (Hanna, 2009). This notion rekindles another recurring theme in history . . . homeland security. What models and resources will emerge to reduce threats to user data and applications? Currently, experts suggests knowing where data is located, testing security, backup information, and only use programs referred by reliable sources (admin in Cloud Hosting, 2011).

Kelly’s video (2007) reveals the impact of the web on the future of humanity by explaining the embodiment, re-structuring, and co-dependency of humankind based on this “one machine.” The notion that the web embodies the material world and leads to complete co-dependency rekindles the idea of totalitarianism. Without battling religious arguments, the idea that everything regarding personal existence will connect to this one machine relates to the complete control and dictatorship of society. Maybe my idea seems extreme. However, thinking in terms of the future, to say that the web will personify existence provokes a feeling of uneasiness as humankind has always been an exclusive group and condition. Now, it seems as though we will become a new kind by uniting with an all-encompassing object that has yet to develop a name and surpass human processing.

References

admin in Cloud Hosting. (2011, Janurary 9). 5 Tips for cloud computing security [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://webhostingblog.us/2011/01/5-tips-for-cloud-computing-security/

Dick, J. (2011, January 3). Tool review: Animoto [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://newlearninginstitute.blogspot.com/2011/01/tool-review-animoto.html

Hanna, S. (2009). Cloud computing: Finding the silver lining. Retrieved from http://www.ists.dartmouth.edu/docs/HannaCloudComputingv2.pdf

Kelly, K. (2007, December). The next 5,000 days of the Web [Speech]. Speech delivered at the EG 2007 Conference, Los Angeles. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/kevin_kelly_on_the_next_5_000_days_of_the_web.html

Krypteia. (2007, August 6). Animoto promo [Vodcast]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvjRzaUYoLw

Educational Impact: Cell Phones

2010-12-28T11:24:00.002-08:00

Larger Image

I made the decision to analyze the educational impact over technical attributes of mobile phone technology. This choice stems from my lack of knowledge and experience regarding cell phones in the educational environment. Using McLuhan’s model, examination of the progressions of cell phone technology reveals explicit implications for adoption.

Cell phones significantly enhance the educational environment through a variety of instructional methods. To begin, cell phones expand the use of mobile learning including distance education and collaborative projects. Additionally, this technology improves data collection for homework, opinion polls, grading quizzes, class discussions, and research projects (Elise, 2008). Another enhancement created by cell phones involves assistive technology. Elise (2008) reports that mobile devices support visual and hearing impairments by offering free online resources and multiple applications for communication such as text and voice. Using cell phones in the educational environment improves communication and collaboration as students actively engage with peers, teachers, and experts to authenticate content. Finally, this technology advances classroom management as students and teachers store video and images, use word processing for notes, save lectures as podcasts, and read online books and articles (Elise, 2008).

The numerous enhancements provided by cell phones leads to discussion on what this technology obsoletes. Currently, budget cut-backs hinder technology development. However, funding for cell phones is the parent’s responsibility. Therefore, schools can integrate educational technology strategies without the burden of purchasing additional computers or mobile devices (Roberson & Hagevik, 2008). Furthermore, the traditional classroom transforms to learner-centered by eliminating the negative opinion that cell phones only promote social behavior. Elise (2008) suggests that future educators will appreciate the technology as a learning tool rather than a social toy.

The theory underlying cell phones in education has roots in the principles of Comenius’ instructional method. His theory supports customized education, integration of subjects, and developmentally appropriate design (Saettler, 2004). Comenius believed that a teacher could educate a mass amount of students by managing the classroom environment with a lesson introduction followed by individual learning segments and collaboration with peers. Before his time, Comenius suggested theory related to distant learning. Like Comenius, classroom strategies associated with cell phones encourage authentic learning experiences, flexible teaching, and learner ingenuity (Prensky, 2005).

Another factor related to retrieval involves global competition. The Space Age spawned urgency for mass education. Mobile technology has significantly impacted the effect on global communication and collaboration. With this technology impacting the educational system, global consciousness redevelops as fierce competition requires innovative and connected graduates (Elise, 2008).

What is the future of cell phones in education? Mobile technology will continue to improve global communication and personalization of digital devices (MOCOM2020, 2010). Additionally, MOCOM2020 (2010) reports over 4 billion mobile phone users. These facts lead to the belief that educational barriers will diminish as students develop into digital natives, compelling institutions to change traditional practices to digital methods. Eventually, educational technology theory will thrive as acceptance of mobile technology reaches critical mass.

References

Elise. (2008, September 7). Cell phones in education: An interview with Liz Korb [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://cellphones.org/blog/cell-phones-in-education-an-interview-with-liz-korb/

Kolb, L. (2010). From toy to tool: Cell phones in learning [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://www.cellphonesinlearning.com/

MOCOM2020. (2010, August 16). Mobile 2020: How will the future of mobile look like? [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://www.mocom2020.com/2010/08/mobile-2020-how-will-the-future-of-mobile-look-like/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Mocom2020+%28MOCOM2020%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo

Prensky, M. (2005). What can you learn from a cell phone?: Almost anything. Innovate, 1(5). Retrieved from http://innovateonline.info/pdf/vol1_issue5/What_Can_You_Learn_from_a_Cell_Phone__Almost_Anything!.pdf

Roberson, J. H., & Hagevik, R. A. (2008). Cell phones for education. Meridian: A Middle School Computer Technologies Journal, 11(2). Retrieved from http://www.ncsu.edu/meridian/sum2008/roberson/index.htm

Saettler, P. (2004). The evolution of American educational technology. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing Inc.

2010-12-28T11:24:00.001-08:00

Emerging Technolgy: The Pocket Projector

2010-12-16T17:37:00.000-08:00

In 2008, several companies launched the first pocket projectors. This handheld, portable device enables users to cast multiple applications including video and images onto a screen equipped to 50 inches. Pocket projectors connect to a variety of media devices including the iPod, computer, digital camera, and cell phone (Feierman, 2010). At $300 for high-quality, this cost-efficient mobile device creates another element to a collaborative, interactive teaching environment.

The major challenges of this technology include improving battery life, brightness, and resolution. Currently, pocket projector developers are making advancements to improve these issues in newer models. Currently, the average battery life ranges from 30 minutes to 2 hours. By 2012, Colegrove (2010) predicts the battery life will extend to 4 hours. The brightness and resolution pales in comparison to the detail of larger digital projectors. However, the demand for this technology is increasing causing significant advances. Colegrove (2010) reports up to 50% better resolution since the first models.

Pocket projectors are designed to be used anywhere. Because the device travels easily, it offers multiple solutions for classroom, business, and entertainment demonstrations. The small size is an noticeable advantage. However, pocket projectors are also eco-friendly, lightweight, compatible with multiple devices, battery-operated, and feature an extended lamp life (Jennifer, 2009). In the classroom, pocket projects offer a simple solution to displaying images, video, and text (Mosotech, 2010). The unlimited learning opportunities will craft lessons that will spark discovery and invoke a spirit of collaboration.

Once sound and visual quality improve, pocket projectors will improve communication in the classroom. The demand for this emerging technology reveals that it is well on its way to becoming emerged. A remote would make this technology even better. Accessing the files from an separate location would add an additional “Wow” factor.

View the following video for a demonstration.

References

Colegrove, J. (2010, November 8). Pocket projectors advance in features, brightness, and battery life [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://www.displaysearchblog.com/2010/11/pocket-projectors-advance-in-features-brightness-and-battery-life/

Feierman, A. (2010, October). The 2010 pico projector and pocket projector guide and reviews. Retrieved from http://www.projectorreviews.com/pico_projectors/index.php

Jennifer. (2009, February 16). New pocket projectors vs. low-priced lcd projector [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://articles.projectorpeople.com/home-theater-tech-news/new-pocket-projectors-vs-low-priced-lcd-projector/

Mosotech. (2010, July 4). Pocket projector: The most handy technology is small size for classrooms [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://moso-technology.com/2010/07/pocket-projector-the-most-handy-technology-is-small-size-for-classrooms/

Module 5 Video

2010-05-12T17:15:00.000-07:00

Hey!

I just wanted to add this video. It shows the kids using the ARCS strategies to motivate Mr. Hesitant in using ActivInspire.

Module 5 Blog

2010-05-10T18:37:00.000-07:00

So, I got my kids to help me out with this week's blog. I thought it would be a great idea to have them role-playing the situation that took place between myself and teacher. I am an avid Activboard user and updating whenever I have the chance. The new version called ActivInspire, old is called ActivStudio, was the latest about 8 months ago, so I was trying to convert everyone. However, this particular teacher, called Mr. Hesitant in the movie, was very reluctant to change. He finally downloaded the innovation after seeing my latest flipchart with tons of media, voting device quizzes, and graphic organizers. Anyway, the kids are acting this out and using the ARCS model to demonstrate how I could have influenced this particular to change. I apologize for the sound. Although wild monkeys, turn a camera on, and they shut down.

So what did you think?

To add to their message, Mr. Hesitant exhibited cautious behaviors that prohibited him from adopting the new software. He shows interest but does not want to spend time learning a new skill. He lacks motivation to download the new software. He also does not see the relevance in training on a new topic that serves the same purpose as the mastered skill. Removing this uncertainty requires motivation through a little peer pressure and interpersonal networking.

Mr. Hesitant also exhibits a skeptical and apathetic attitude because he fails to recognize the benefits of the new program. In particular, Mr. Hesitant is unwilling to try ActivInspire because of a strong opposition related to time and traditional values. To change this attitude, he must experience shared goals and assurance of ActivInspire's effectiveness.

Using Keller's ARCS model, I can promote and sustain optimistic adoption of the software.

A: Attention

Grabbing Mr. Hesitant's attention involves perceptual and inquiry arousal (Learning Theories Knowledge Base, 2010). Because he likes to use games in the classroom, I could make a flipchart using the dual user feature with one of the game templates and scoreboards. Next, I have to maintain his interest, so I would keep demonstrating the new software with video from the Promethean site, stimulating examples, and simple documentation of student results.

R: Relevance

Another factor for stimulating motivation is enhancing relevance. Promoting relevance means training the learner on the benefits of the new innovation and defining personal goals (Driscoll, 2005). One strategy for Mr. Hesitant would be to invite him to see student assessment using Inspire and voting devices. I would show him how quickly you can grade work and discuss student responses. This would show him the relevance of learning the new program, especially since it addresses his concern of giving immediate feedback and quick assessment.

C: Confidence

Intimidation affects motivation to engage in learning. Therefore, activities to build confidence are included in the model to create positive experiences and high expectations (Narayan, 2006). First, I would show him the differences between Inspire and Studio making sure to explain the easy transition. I would stick with just a few differences and gradually build on them. Next, I would practice with him on creating flipcharts and using the new features. As we work together, I may find out new tricks that I didn’t know, which makes Mr. Hesitant feel like he is contributing to the training. Finally, I would give him time to experiment with the new technology and be there when he has questions.

S: Satisfaction

The final component of motivation is generating satisfaction. Establishing satisfaction reinforces and builds on previous success to sustain newly acquired skills. Strategies to generate satisfaction require building a sense of accomplishment (TechnoparkToday.com, 2009). I would give him chances to see and use the software in his personal classroom. Whenever he succeeded at creating a new flipchart activity, I would reward him with praise and maybe a prize to encourage participation. Finally, I would keep it fair by sticking with the goal of using the software to improve instruction. I can introduce more complex features later.

References

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Learning Theories Knowledgebase. (2010, May). ARCS Model of motivational design (Keller) at Learning-Theories.com [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://www.learning-theories.com/kellers-arcs-model-of-motivational-design.html

Narayan, A. (2006, September 28). ARCS model [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://elearning.kern-comm.com/2006/09/arcs-model/

TechnoparkToday.com. (2009, April 22). How to learn from your workplace? [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://www.technoparktoday.com/how-to-learn-from-your-workplace/

Module 4 Mind Map

2010-04-27T17:35:00.000-07:00

Reflecting on my mind map, my social network is virtually limited to the Walden learning community. Then again, my network was not this large until I started Walden, so this thought demonstrates the power of Walden’s program in building constructive learning communities. Before beginning this program, I did not use networks in the learning process relying mostly on personal interpretation and evidence created by experts. Currently, networked learning affects all avenues of the learning process including delivery, dissemination, creation, and reflection of knowledge. The learning community combats misconceptions and channels thoughtful communication to support accomplishment of objectives. Siemens (2004) would argue that the collaborative distribution of information within the Walden community engages learners in influential relationships that trigger and sustain the learning process. Therefore, my learning network contributes to knowledge acquisition by clarifying explanation through discussion and illuminating connections with information.

The most influential digital tools to facilitate my learning are threaded discussions and video. Blogs, wikis, online chat, and discussion boards are the most valuable when creating knowledge because I read, reflect, and reassess until knowledge is specifically applied in my workplace. The openness of these networked technologies facilitates necessary feedback for lucidity of knowledge (Siemens, 2009). Another significant digital tool, video, provides the visual stimulation I need to make connections with meaningful text. Although web-based video does not construct a learning community, the resource provides a means for knowledge inquiry and a reflection opportunity. In addition to discussion and video, Smartphone and social bookmarking technology facilitate my learning. Currently, I am exploring education apps to integrate in the classroom (IEAR.org, 2010). Delicious, a social bookmarking organizes information to track, discover, and archive school-related topics.

When learning a new skill, I rely on text and video to actuate the learning process. I reflect on personal beliefs and engage in instructional discourse with my learning community to filter excessive or incorrect information. During this time, I ask my learning community for clarification and expression of new learning. Then, I reflect once again and modify assumptions. This habitual practice satisfies learning connections allowing application of knowledge.

References

IEAR.org (2010, April 22). IEAR tips and tricks #4. Message posted to http://www.iear.org/

Siemens, G. (2009, November 24). Weltanschauung: Changing views, changing systems.

Message posted to http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/connectivism/

Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved from http://elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

Module 3 Blog: Collaboration

2010-04-13T16:40:00.001-07:00

I saw this on Fishburne's (2008) site and had to include in on our discussion regarding constructivism in the classroom. Constructivism places the teacher in a guidance role in which he/she steers students in the right direction. Without the guidance discussed in constructivist principles, learning outcomes would surely lead to misconceptions.

After extensively studying learning theory, a central theme in meaningful learning is the internal desire for making connections and building relationships. To say that this idea highlights connecting with a group of people, I am not educated enough to say. However, the constructivists believe that social interaction is vital in cognitive development. I believe this approach to learning has increased since the rise of the internet. Both Rheingold (2008) and Zittrain (2009) propose the network structure developed by the internet rekindled cultural beliefs of responsible communication and sharing of resources. Therefore, technology imitates natural instincts and improves the capacity for collaboration. Another aspect of the internet improving collective performance involves the ability for the individual to see immediate results increasing interest for cooperation (Rheingold, 2008). Altogether, there are tasks that are too difficult to complete alone and collaborative projects are the answer when individual effort impedes transfer of knowledge.

See Zittrain's (2009) video on collaboration, and the web's connection to natural instincts.

It has already been discussed that technology promotes collaboration. Open source software is an example of the Internet’s vast capacity of enhancing human cooperation. However, interaction is not just about selected technology tools. According to constructivist principles, learners bring cultural experiences and internalized motivation that teachers can use to promote learning (Driscoll, 2005). Collaboration involves sharing experiences, skills, and reflections to achieve understanding and accelerate development. The internet readily promotes these ideals by offering resources for discovery and project-based learning, motivation for instruction, and communication tools for internalization (Cofino, 2010). The final outcome reveals that learners exhibit authentic interpretation and performance.

Instructional design, using constructivist pedagogy, requires selection of digital media to guide learners and bridge the gap between content and applicable knowledge. The significance of a culture of collaboration is emphasized with technology integration especially when open source software and web 2.0 tools are integrated into learning activities (Anderson, 2010). Students construct knowledge while working in groups on collaborative projects incorporating wikis, blogs, Google Docs, meeting whiteboards, instant messaging, virtual environments, and other web 2.0 tools. Examination of these tools reveals the importance of interactive instruction and ease at which the internet facilitates a constructivist classroom.

References

Anderson, C. (2010, April 12). New additions to the digital backpack. Message posted to http://carlanderson.blogspot.com/

Cofino, K. (2010, March 10). Creating a culture of collaboration through technology integration. Message posted to http://kimcofino.com/blog/2010/03/20/creating-a-culture-of-collaboration-through-technology-integration/

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Fishburne, T. (2008, September 8). If kids designed the food pyramid. Image posted to http://www.tomfishburne.com/tomfishburne/2008/09/if-kids-designe.html

Rheingold, H. (2008, February). Howard Rehingold on collaboration. Vodcast posted to http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/howard_rheingold_on_collaboration.html

Zittrain, J. (2009, September). The web as random acts of kindness. Podcast posted to http://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_zittrain_the_web_is_a_random_act_of_kindness.html

Module 2 Blog: Cognitive Comparison

2010-03-28T15:11:00.000-07:00

The experts agree that instructional design should consist of multiple learning theories to target several dimensions of learning (Kapp, 2007; Kerr, 2007). An underlying grievance with focusing on one theory is that learners do not bring equal insights into the learning context. Therefore, educators should consciously integrate multiple approaches in designing a lesson to ensure all students construct knowledge. For example, behaviorism and cognitivism propose the most efficient manner of knowledge acquisition. Both agree that repetition of a skill is one way to achieve meaningful learning. Although, cognitivism focuses more on the type of activity rather than the behaviorist view of drill and practice (Driscoll, 2005).

Pondering on the recommendations of each strategy, I created a personal mental representation of two students in my classroom. The following chart describes two situations in which a student faces difficulty in Reading. However, one student lacks memorization while the other lacks comprehension. I attempted to use what I have learned to create an instructional plan for each student. Please read and make comments.

Interestingly, both theories also agree on the importance of internalizing information. Yet, experience and research has developed the idea of externalization as the most significant method to understanding new information. The following video clip from George Siemens (2007) discusses externalization of knowledge as the best strategy for facilitating meaningful learning. His notion that students need to express and share knowledge with others in a variety of ways changes traditional views that learning is a remote process. According to Siemens (2007), true knowledge acquisition occurs through social networks where the externalization of thoughts is encouraged and skills of learning are developed.

In my experiences as an early childhood educator, students who express and share ideas through graphic representations and writing are able to apply knowledge in a variety of situations. Without this instructional skill, students are only successful when the experience matches the first acquaintance, Cooperative group tasks such as digital storytelling and wikis allow students to connect with information and accurately create models of knowledge (Talisayon, 2010). If you are not giving your students the opportunity to externalize knowledge, you are decreasing their capacity for learning.

References

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Kapp, K. (2007, January 2). Out and about: Discussion on educational schools of thought. Message posted to http://karlkapp.blogspot.com/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational.html

Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). _isms as filter, not blinker. Message posted to http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html

Siemens, G. (2007, September 2). The conflict of learning theories with human nature. Video podcast retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTgWt4Uzr54

Talisayon, A. (2010, March 25). Series G: “Grawing-and-griting”: Making visible what we are thinking together. Message posted to http://apintalisayon.wordpress.com/

Module 1 - Metaphors of Educators

2010-03-17T17:45:00.000-07:00

Siemens (2008) describes four metaphors of educators to argue new models of teaching pedagogy in today’s digital age. “Educator as Master Artist” implies that the instructor offers expert guidance but permits the student to draw knowledge from fellow classmates and authentic experiences. Forming learning networks is the primary role of the “Educator as Network Administrator.” The “Educator as Concierge” brings awareness to resources and guides students as they explore knowledge. Finally, Siemens (2008) notion of “Educator as Curator” presents the most valuable model of instruction. The instructor creates the best learning environment with appropriate resources and activities related to the subject. Students explore and interpret the information with supportive guidance from the instructor.

Of these representations, the educator as curator suggestion speaks the most in regards to educational culture in the digital classroom. The duties of an instructor cannot narrow to one primary task. Instead, the holistic purpose involves creating, managing, supporting, and assessing all facets of knowledge exploration. Learners construct knowledge based on individual exploration and interpretation of information using the prominent avenues of web-based instruction (Williams, 2009). Additionally, students do not need an instructor to create or reinforce connections due to the natural ease of connectivism in today’s digital world (Siemens, 2010). Yet, students do require a structured framework of the learning experience to reduce intellectual frustration and increase likelihood of success. Finally, the educator’s actions must readily engage students in subject material and cautiously facilitate the path of learning.

My haunting question after reading the four models is, “Why is it that experts feel the need to compare my role to the duties of other professional positions?” The roles and responsibilities of a true educator are not comparable to any other person employed by an organization. I say, as an educator, “I AM,” not “I am like,” when describing the special work I do on a daily basis.
However, if I must provide a metaphor, no offense to the experts, I will not use another profession as a means of representing myself. Instead, I suggest “Educator as an Eagle.” This thought came to me as I read a daily devotion from renowned evangelists Joyce Meyer (2009). The eagle, the most majestic of creatures, is the best example to describe the natural characteristics and exemplary work of an educator. The following video describes my thoughts on “Teacher as an Eagle.”

I know it is not the most advanced show in the world. However, I have been teaching my kids how to make media projects, so we worked on this together. They love doing graduate work!

References

Siemens, G. (2010, February 16). Teaching in social and technological networks. Message posted to http://www.connectivism.ca/?p=220

Siemens, G. (2008, January 27). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. Paper presented to ITFORUM. Retrieved from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf

Meyer, J. (2009, May 14). Sour like an eagle. Message posted to http://www.christianpost.com/article/20090514/soar-like-an-eagle/index.html

Williams, J. (2009, November 23). From teacher to content curator. Message posted to http://authenticlearning.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/from-teacher-to-content-curator/

The Wiki Web Project

2009-08-16T09:00:00.000-07:00

Here is my PPT as a video. Let me know if you would like me to post the PPT version.

Thanks! Marci

Final Project: Social Presence

2009-08-09T14:25:00.000-07:00

Well, here it is!! I am not the most excited about it, but I gave it my very all. I learned that I would rather talk through written communication because my speech skills need polishing.
Maybe you will learn a little something from it!

Video clips and clipart were obtained from Corel, Animation Factory, and a few were downloaded from Google images. I will post my annotated bibliography in the doc sharing area of our course.

All I can say is Tah-Dah!

2009-08-01T12:22:00.000-07:00

Module 5 Blog Discussion

This diagram represents the difference between static and dynamic technologies as discussed in Moller’s (2008) article. Static technologies emphasize content and rely heavily on text applications. These technologies include web 1.0, print, and one-to-one restricted correspondence. On the contrary, dynamic technologies empower learners with interaction with information and social networks to conceptualize real meaning and experience wisdom. Characteristics of dynamic technologies include synchronous communication, problem-based simulations, collaboration tools, web 2.0, and mind tools (Moller, 2008).

As far as my level of familiarity, I am in the middle of the static-dynamic continuum. Static technologies do not provide high levels of interactivity with information to construct knowledge as it relates to my area of work. However, I do rely on my textbooks and journal articles to obtain the majority of content. This is an area that I would like to see improve with more real world applications through conversations with experts and visual representation. Also, static technologies do not promote collaboration with my classmates. These technologies are highly dependent on individual accountability and rarely construct personalization in interaction.

On the other hand, dynamic technologies are new in my technology repertoire. I am beginning to use wikis and blogs to participate in collaboration with peers. I have also recently chatted with classmates through Skype to reflect on class discussions and build a deeper understanding of their content discourse. Although considered middle of the road for many, these technologies are dynamic in the sense that they provide continuous opportunities to recreate information and internalize information (Kirschner & Erkens, 2006).

To move towards a more dynamic approach to learning, I must continue to reflect on information and reconstruct content to gain deeper understanding. As static technologies plagued most of my undergraduate and part of my graduate career, embracing this higher-level thinking has been a real struggle. Yet, the constant risk-taking approaches involving technologies and learning modes unfamiliar to me will supply the best learning experiences that emulate practical situations and behaviors. I am in constant conflict with tradition and innovation but courses such as this one are earning my respect as the best approach for authentic learning.

References

Jonassen, D., Carr, C., & Yueh, H. (1998, March). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in crtical thinking. [Electronic Verson]. TechTrends, 43(2), 24-32. Retrieved July 31, 2009, from http://www.ecls.ncl.ac.uk/webprimary/elearning/ICT_Tools%5EComputers%20as%20Mindtools%5Earticle%20by%20Jonassen.pdf

Kirschner, P., & Erkens, G. (2006). Cognitive tools and mindtools for collaborative learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(2), 199-209. Retrieved July 31, 2009, from Academic Search Premier database.

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

Slangen, L. (2005). Mind tools contributing to an ICT-rich learning environment for technology education in primary schools. [Electronic Version]. Int. J. Cont. Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning, 15(3-6), 225-239. Retrieved July 31, 2009, from http://dspace.ou.nl/bitstream/1820/608/1/050830IJCEELL%2015(3-6)%20Paper%2008%20Mindtools.pdf

Using mindtools in education. (2005). Retrieved July 31, 2009, from http://thejournal.com/articles/2005/04/01/using-mindtools-in-education.aspx

Engaging Learners With New Strategies and Tools

2009-07-22T13:47:00.000-07:00

Click on the picture to see larger view

(Durrington, V., Berryhill, A., Swafford, J., 2006)

(McGreal, R., Elliot, M., 2008)

Engaging Learners Reflection

The graphic organizer published on this week’s blog classifies several strategies and corresponding technological tools according to content, communication, and collaboration tasks within the online environment. This reflection will justify use of these strategies and tools to engage learners and improve the online learning experience.

Content:

The most critical issue regarding content and online learning occurs between distributing learning resources and knowledge acquisition. According to Siemens (2007), the selected artifacts for an online course must be arranged and issued in such a way that learners explore information, reconstruct prior knowledge into new schemata, and engage in public discourse to achieve true wisdom. A number of technologies distribute information including CD-ROM, DVD, and acquired course management software. However, many technologies available free on the internet engage learners including podcast, vodcasts (YouTube), and online journals. Learning is commonly accessible anywhere, anytime with the latest technologies.

Communication:

Not only do students need sufficient learning resources, but they also require engaging dialogue with classmates through asynchronous or synchronous methods of communication. Audio chat technologies, email, and instant messaging provide the opportunity for online learners to provide feedback and challenge viewpoints (Durrington, V., Berryhill, A., & Swafford, J., 2006). Learning occurs when members of the community interact in meaningful conversation a (Moller, L., Harvey, D., Downs, M., & Godshalk, V., n.d.). The social networking sites and tools available on the web support communication in both synchronous and asynchronous contexts. Additionally, personal electronic exchanges facilitate interactive relationships to improve overall course satisfaction. The key to any successful online conversation is timeliness in response to participants (Durrington, V., et al., 2006).

Collaboration:

The final element of engaging learners in the online environment involves active participation in collaborative, problem-based activities. Group activities should include a small number of participants, solve relevant problems, encourage accountability, and facilitate discussion (Durrington, V., et al., 2006). The web offers several tools for collaboration including wikis, blog, and virtual worlds. Wikis enable users to review and edit text to create a collaborative product. Blogs do not allow others to edit content, however, each member may contribute to a asynchronous discussion area to solve problems. Finally, virtual worlds, an innovation that has yet to diffuse in online learning, provides a simulated environment where each participant assumes a role and participates in empirical learning (McGreal, R., & Elliot, M., 2008). Each of these tools facilitates problem-based learning and offers real experience to solving social issues in the environment.

By using familiar and simple tools throughout the online experience, students are prepared to engage in the online environment and focus on collecting and sharing perspectives rather than technicalities. The central goal of any educational program is learning. Although distance education requires multimedia applications for data transfer, the main purpose is to provide an authentic learning experience. These effective strategies and informal tools combine to provide effective student experiences and successful degree programs.

References

Durrington, V., Berryhill, A., Swafford, J. (2006). Strategies for enhancing student interactivity in an online environment. College Teaching, 54(1), 190-193. Retrieved July 15, 2009, from http://ezp.waldenulibrary.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=19754742&site=ehost-live&scope=site

McGreal, R., & Elliot, M. (2008). Technologies of online learning (e-learning). In T. Anderson (Ed.) The Theory and Practice of Online Learning (2nd ed., pp. 143-165). Edmonton, AB: AU Press.

Moller, L., Harvey, D., Downs, M., Godshalk, V. (n.d.). Identifying factors that effect learning community development and performance in asynchronous distance education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 1(4), 293-305. Retrieved July 20, 2009, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ621837&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ621837

Siemens, G. (Speaker). (2007). Curatorial teaching. Elluminate recording posted at http://learnonline.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/10-minute-lecture-george-siemens-curatorial-teaching/

Module 3: Collaboration in the Learning Community

2009-07-06T17:50:00.000-07:00

Effective instructors in online communities have four major responsibilities including facilitate discussions and activities, model acceptable learning behaviors, participate in the development and preservation of the community, and evaluate student progress (Pallloff & Pratt, 2005). It is possible for students to complete course requirements without instructor involvement, except for the task of assessment. The evaluation process is a critical element for both instructor and student. The instructor must provide fair and challenging assessment while proving adequate student progress. The student must provide evidence of learning to receive acceptance from the instructor using chosen methods of assessment. Therefore, the means of evaluation profoundly affects the online course as it provides the final outcome for success.

The course readings for Module 3 emphasized collaborative assessment as the best approach for online learning communities. The issue in collaborative assessment involves providing individual progress monitoring based on cooperative assignments. Based on Siemens (2008a) analysis, a rating scheme based on individual contributions provides fair and targeted outcomes. This tailors assessment to individual needs by examining the impact of the student’s strengths and weakness on the final product. Davis (2007) discusses the significance of web 2.0 tools in assessing cooperative groups because it allows instructors to continuously assess individual contributions to group projects as well as provide peer assessment and feedback. Individual accountability is determined through tracking edits and additions to web-based software such as wikis and blogs.

This brings us to another issue in collaborative assessment. Students that do not wish to collaborate in online communities present challenges for the learning group and the instructor. The instructor must communicate the “participative pedagogy” at the onset of the course to inform students of the decision to utilize collaborative activities (Siemens, 2008a). Additional help from the instructor includes role-playing activities, assessment models including group and individual efforts, and collaborative awareness. Assessment plans must include rubrics for collaborative awareness to evaluate efforts of interaction within the online community (Siemens, 2008b). Members not contributing to the final product are negatively impacting the group and need to receive assignment to another group or individual form of evaluation.

Students involved with an inactive or intimidated peer should first build trust by openly discussing roles and responsibilities (Siemens, 2008b). If a team member continues to exhibit harmful behaviors towards the group, the instructor must intervene to prevent this humanistic poison from destroying group dynamic and successful outcomes.

References

Davis, V. (2007, October 9). Cooperative learning notes: Day 2. Message posted to http://coolcatteacher.blogspot.com/2007/10/cooperative-learning-notes-day-2.html

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

Siemens, G. (2008a). Assessment of Collaborative Learning [DVD]. Laureate Education, Inc.

Siemens, G. (2008b). Learning communities [DVD]. Laureate Education, Inc.

Storyboard for Social Presence

2009-07-05T13:31:00.000-07:00

Hey Classmates,

Here is my very sketchy, somewhat unorganized storyboard. I am trying so hard to pull some ideas together. This activity is helping, but I am still working towards a creative approach because I know slides of research will not be accepted, not that I am that boring of a person anyway. I had to turn each slide into a JPG and put into moviemaker to show here in the blog. If you want to make additions to it, I have put in on my wikispace at http://mavining.wikispaces.com/Social+Presence. You can see my notes there too. It is a work in progress for sure, any suggestions are much appreciated, but I am going to be working on the video and other imaging for sure. Improvements are to come!!

Here is a little background about social presence so you know the details of my topic:

What is social presence?

The ability to represent yourself as a real person including sharing attitudes, beliefs, values, and ideas in the online environment. This is easy in face to face communication because you can actually view expressions and nonverbal cues. However, text-based environments prohibit the natural ability to show social presence, so in collaboration online, you must work at posting messages that reveal the real you and interpret messages by others in the same way.

Why is social presence an important factor in distance education?

Simply, individuals who lack social presence or who fail to connect with the perceptions of others are dissastified with online learning, increase the attrition rate, and rate instructor's as uneffective. It can also affect cognitive learning by facilitating frustration and isolation.

How do you increase social presence?

Interaction and connectivity through different types of media. Use personal experiences in post and share support with the group to promote deeper understandings of concepts and enhance learning. Collaborative group projects work well in developing social presence.

These are just a few thoughts. I have been reading about it for a while, so I didn't reference my sources because I am reflecting on the knowledge I have acquired thus far. However, the storyboard does include a reference list.

Apology

2009-06-23T18:42:00.000-07:00

I apologize for not turning in my blog earlier than today. I like to give everyone plenty of time to post. However, my sister had a heart cath that turned into emergency heart surgery. I have become the primary caretaker of her young children for a week or so. I apologize for the delay.

Module 2 Discussion Blog

2009-06-23T18:39:00.000-07:00

Blog Discussion 2

Communication in Distance Learning

The reliance on innovative communication tools for interaction provides an effective online learning environment. Early distance education courses primarily focused on asynchronous learning techniques such as threaded messages, email, wikis, blogs, and discussion boards. However, due to increased access and advancement of communication technologies asynchronous methods are gradually contributing more to the evolution of distance education. Videoconferencing, live chats, and phone interactions provide superior methods of communication to guide instruction and build a community of online learners (Corbeil, 2006). Although many educators argue that combining both asynchronous and synchronous technologies provides best practices in communication and personal empowerment (Saba, 2006).

Siemens (2008) agrees that advancement in communication increases acceptance and quality of online education. A variety of communication tools facilitate collaborate interactions. Hensley (2009, June 23) describes a wealth of online communication tools to enhance the classroom including Twitter, Eduslide, Google Apps, and Mikogo. (See the complete list on her blog).

Finally, wide acceptance and diffusion of communication technologies in society generates familiarity with tools used in the online environment. Learners possessing awareness of these tools immediately feel comfortable in the online environment increasing the probability of a positive learning experience (Siemens, 2008).

References

Carbeil, J.R. (2006). Desktop videoconferencing in distance education: From revolution to evolution. Retrieved June 23, 2009, from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/powerpoint/SWR0670.pps

Hensley, P. (2009, June 23). 20 communication and networking tools for teachers. Message posted to http://successfulteaching.blogspot.com/2009/06/20-communication-and-networking-tools.html

Saba, F. (2006, December 19). On asynchronous learning. Message posted to http://www.distance-educator.com/blog/saba/

Siemens, G. (2008). The future of distance education [DVD]. Laureate Education, Inc.

The Next Generation of Distance Education

2009-06-05T17:56:00.000-07:00

Distance education is entering a paradigm shift catapulted by increased access to online communities and the need to step out of the shadows of traditional classrooms to present a standalone approach to higher learning. According to Simonson (2008), distance education has successfully diffused as an acceptable educational approach. Yet, a restructuring of the development of online classrooms is needed for effective learning experiences. Simonson (2000) advocates the equivalency theory which utilizes an instructional design approach matching learning outcomes and activities with diverse and appropriate technologies. In this theory of learning, distance education provides learning experiences equivalent to face to face education employing different instructional strategies and activities (Simonson, 2000).

Research conducted by Huett, Moller, Foshay, and Coleman (2008) suggest that the diffusion of distance education continues to face extreme barriers including funding and general lack of approval. Huett et al. (2008) advocate a new mindset regarding distance education stemming from the refusal to continue comparison to traditional methods. Research systematically proves no significant difference in student achievement between online and face to face instruction (Huett et al., 2008). Instead, researchers should focus on successful teaching and learning within various distance education environments to restructure the instructional design and improve the nature of work and education. Simply put, “no single line of research can possibly lay a unique claim to ultimate wisdom and understanding” (Huett et al., 2008, p.66). Therefore, an evolution in distance education must determine how to meet the needs of diverse learners using a multitude of emerging technologies while maintaining focus on learning outcomes and advancement of intellectual thinking.

Similarly, both Simonson and Huett et al. understand the necessity for improving distance education. It is more important to implement a variety of theoretical ideas and instructional practices rather than focus on a single idea that may or may not positively affect the student. The development of the next generation of distance education courses has the potential to transform the learning experience and possibly restructure traditional methods of learning. Technology, the medium surrounding online instruction, is a driving force to enhancing collaboration, generating knowledge, reflecting on ideas, and motivating lifelong learning. Along with technology, the evolution of distance education must utilize revolutionary educators unafraid to take risk in the eternal effort to raise student intellectual property and passion for commitment and success.

References

Huett, J., Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Coleman, C. (2008, September/October). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the web [Electronic Version]. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 52(5), 63-67. Retrieved June 4, 2009, from Academic Search Premier database.

Simonson, M. (Speaker). (2008). Distance Education: The Next Generation [DVD]. Laureate Education, Inc.

Simonson, M. (2000). Making decisions: The use of electronic technology in online classrooms [Electronic Version]. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 84, 29-44. Retrieved June 4, 2009, from Academic Search Premier database.