View
1.867
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Finding the Good Fit: Faculty Members,
Instruction, Evidence, and Technology
Patricia A. McGee, PhD
Patricia.mcgee@utsa.edu
Associate Professor/2003 NLII Fellow
Instructional Technology
Department of Educational Psychology
University of Texas at San Antonio
Veronica M. Diaz, PhDdrvdiaz@gmail.com
Instructional Technology ManagerMaricopa Center for Learning and Instruction
Maricopa Community CollegesAdjunct Professor, Northern Arizona University
Welcome
• Introductions
• Materials – Binder– CD– Presentation materials
available at http://elearning-design.pbwiki.com/
Seminar Overview
• Web 2.0: Diffusion, Instructional Development and Support
• Understanding Faculty Members and Learners and Web 2.0
• Content, Pedagogy, Assessment, and Tools
Part IWeb 2.0: Diffusion,
Instructional Development and Support
Web 2.0 (Twitter) and the World Simulation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgbfMY-6giY
WEB 2.0Model of Diffusion and Other Considerations
Sources: http://www.jeffro2pt0.com/images/web1_0-vs-web2_0.png and ttp://jensthraenhart.com/cblog/uploads/web20.jpg
Technology Adoption Lifecycle
http://techticker.net/2008/06/06/technology-adoption-lifecycle/
Web 2.0 Tools andDistributed Learning
Models
Delivery ModelsProportion of
Content Delivered
Online
Type of Course
Typical Description
0% Traditional Course with no online technology used — content is delivered in writing or orally.
1 to 29% Web Enhanced Course which uses web-based technology to facilitate what is essentially a face-to-face course. Uses a course management system (CMS) or web pages to post the syllabus and assignments, for example.
30 to 79% Blended/Hybrid
Distributed Engagement
Course that blends online and face-to-face delivery. Substantial proportion of the content is delivered online, typically uses online discussions, and typically has some face-to-face meetings.
80% + Online A course where most or all of the content is delivered online. Typically have no face-to-face meetings.
Sloan-C, 2007
The Models
Buffet Model
• Allows the learner to complete instructional sequences at their own pace
• Various learning environments
• Various supports
• On-campus and distributed environments
• Allows students to progress through material in the way and speed that is most appropriate for them Example:
Foothill College, Math My Way
Blended/Hybrid (Replacement)
• Blended learning courses combine online and classroom learning activities and resources in an optimal way to improve student learning outcomes and to address important institutional issues
• Classroom attendance (“seat time”) is reduced
Example: Estrella Mountain Community College, Learning College
100% Online
• All course activities, resources, interactions, and communications occur online, typically through an institutional learning/course management system
Example: Rio Salado College Online
Models and Web 2.0
• The containers• Redesign approach• Pedagogy• Discipline
What models are you most active in?
• Web enhanced (F2F)• Buffet• Blended/Hybrid• Online
INSTRUCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT MODELS AND SUPPORT
Akker, 1998; Goodlad, 1994; Romiszowski,1981
Program and Course Levels
InputsGoals
Objectives
Standards
Institutional mission
Goals
Objectives
Constituents Administrators
Faculty members
Staff
Students
Faculty members
Students
ProgramLevel
CourseLevel
Object (Module or Unit) and Individual Levels
Inputs Objectives
Technology selection
Development team Designers
Media specialists
Technologists
Granular, at course level
Constituents Faculty members
Students
Faculty members
Students
ObjectLevel
IndividualLevel
Delivery models, instructional development models, and
support
Diffusion of Innovation
?
Experimentational Transitions
Stages
1. Experimentation
2. Extension and transition
3. Standardization of support
4. Integration into curriculum
5. Diffusion
Characteristics
• Data collection throughout
• Communication with campus community
• Innovative culture • Strong connection to
curriculum and disciplines • Robust support for the
faculty and students
Support Models & Innovation
• Relationship to development models
• Relationship to innovation and diffusion
• Centralized
• Experimental/pilot
• Decentralized
• None
WEB 2.0 AND INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES/CONSIDERATIONS
Quality Assurance and Web 2.0
Peer Course Peer Course ReviewReview
FeedbackFeedback
CourseCourse
Course Meets Course Meets Quality ExpectationsQuality Expectations
Course Course RevisionRevision
Instructional Designers
InstitutionsFaculty Course Developers National Standards &
Research Literature
RubricFaculty Reviewers
Training
Quality Matters Quality Matters Course Peer Course Peer
Review ProcessReview Process
QM Certified Peer Reviewers
• Peer Reviewers receive full-day training to learn– How to interpret the
standards (with examples and annotations)
– How to evaluate a course (hands-on with sample course)
• Reviews are conducted by teams of three peer reviewers– Chair – Peer reviewer
(external)– Peer reviewer (SME)
More about Quality Matters• Quality Matters (QM) is a faculty-centered, peer
review process designed to certify the quality of online and hybrid courses and online components
• A faculty-driven, collaborative peer review process
• Committed to continuous quality improvement
• Based in national standards of best practice, the research literature and instructional design principles
• Designed to promote student learning and success
The Rubric is the Core of Quality Matters
• 40 specific elements across 8 broad areas (general standards) of course quality
• Detailed annotations and examples of good practice for all 40 standards
Quality Matters & Alignment
Essential Standards that Relate to Alignment
• A statement introduces the student to the course and learning
• Navigational instructions• Learning activities foster
interaction:• Instructor-student
• Content-student
• Student-student
• Clear standards are set for instructor response and availability
• Assessment strategies provide feedback
• Grading policy is transparent and easy to understand
• Implemented tools and media support learning objectives
• and integrate with texts and lesson assignments
• The course acknowledges the importance of ADA compliance
Other QM Uses• College quality assurance
review processes• Guidelines for online/hybrid
course development• Faculty development/training
programs• Checklist for improvement of
existing online courses• An element in regional and
professional accreditation
Intellectual Property & Web 2.0
• How broad or inclusive? What tools or learning environments should be addressed?
• How is maintenance of instructional products and systems addressed?
• Employees or units involved in the production process, work time/course of employment issues, resources expended, or units involved?
• Innovation within or outside established, controlled university-owned systems?
Copyright
• Connection to models• Open tools
– YouTube– Wikis
• Faculty perceptions of copyright and fair use
• Liability issues • Student education• Best practices
Three Questions
1. Describe existing instructional delivery and development models for integrating technology into instruction.
2. What are your teaching and learning goals for Web 2.0 tools?
3. What are the support issues that will need to be addressed to achieve your Web 2.0 goals?
Part 2:Understanding Faculty Members and Learners and Web 2.0
Drs. Patricia McGee & Veronica Diaz
Asking the right question
Mapping the Learner Experience
SEMESTER BREAK
Mapping the Instructor Experience
SEMESTER BREAK
People - Data - Things (P-D-T)
Over the past 10 years, teachers and students have increasingly relied on technology to communicate. At the same time there is a perception that teacher’s time on campus has declined. There is an administrative concern that student needs outside of class are not being met, and that lack of campus presence is an indication of teacher apathy.
What people should be included?
What data should be analyzed?
What things are involved?
Learners…
• Are intergenerational.
• May have expectations from prior experience, personal style/needs, disciplinary perspective.
• Have a range of technical abilities.
• Require just-in-need supports.
Informal and “non-traditional”
A part of ubiquitous networks
Not so enamored of technology but believe tech skills may be an advantage (younger over older)
learners are also …
Poll
We regularly survey students about technology use:
1. Yes
2. No
70% never used a PDA
APX 50% never edited video or webpage using WYSWYGAPX 50% never sent a picture via phone
75% never email via phone68% never use phone internet
Most do not blog, wiki, have a web site, etc.
70% never used a PDA
APX 50% never edited video or webpage using WYSWYGAPX 50% never sent a picture via phone
75% never email via phone68% never use phone internet
Most do not blog, wiki, have a web site, etc.
Digital experts?Digital experts?
Although 66.1% have Internet phone most do not use (<18%; <1/4 use PDA)
69% < 20 hrs per week online85.2% use social networks
1/3 create audio/video & games (mostly males)8.8% use virtual worlds
1/3 use blogs, video/image sharing sites, etc.
Although 66.1% have Internet phone most do not use (<18%; <1/4 use PDA)
69% < 20 hrs per week online85.2% use social networks
1/3 create audio/video & games (mostly males)8.8% use virtual worlds
1/3 use blogs, video/image sharing sites, etc.
Digital experts?Digital experts?
Information Literacy?
• Determine the extent of information needed
• Access the needed information effectively and efficiently
• Evaluate information and its sources critically
• Incorporate selected information into one’s knowledge base
• Use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose
• Understand the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information, and access and use information ethically and legally
Poll
My institution has literacy standards that all students must attain:
1. Yes
2. No
3. Only some departments
Learners as novice
• Focus on discrete details• Capture empirical
information• Focus on the use of
formulas and previously learned strategies
Operate at lower levels of thinking
Caveat: Learners are not novices at everything
Novice-expert continuum
Routine Expertise Adaptive Expertise
Tests, papers, experiments, projects, internships, fellowships, mentoring
Mental Function and Skill Level: Five Stage Model
(Dreyfus & Dreyfus, 1980, p. 15)
Novice Competent
Proficient Expert Master
Recollection
Non-situational
Situational Situational Situational Situational
Recognition Decomposed Decomposed Holistic Holistic Holistic
Decision Analytical Analytical Analytical Intuitive Intuitive
Awareness Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Absorbed
Two Dimensions of Transfer and Learning
Routine Expert
Adaptive Expert
Novice
Efficiency
FrustratedNovice
(Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000)
Supporting developing expertise
• Move from concrete/discrete to generalized patterns
• Assess degree of expertise
• Provide opportunities for learners to aggregate achievements, collect evidence, apply course learning outside of class
Disciplinary Foci
Hard Natural Sciences
Hard Applied Sciences
Natural:•Logical reasoning.•Testing of ideas in linear form of argumentation.•Reliance on facts, principles, and concepts.Applied:•Problem-solving and practical skills •Emphasis on integration and application of existing knowledge
(White & Liccardi, 2006)
Learner Preference
Hard Natural Sciences
Hard Applied Sciences
• Online tutorials• Reference materials• Objective tests (also VLEs)• Support the mastery of facts,
principles and concepts. • Quantitative, closed
assessments
(White & Liccardi, 2006)
IMPLICATIONS FOR ASSESSMENT?
Learners: Disciplinary Foci
Soft Pure
Soft Applied
Pure•Broad command of intellectual ideas.•Emphasis on creativity in thinking and fluency of expression.Applied:•Emphasis on personal growth and intellectual breadth.•Development of reflective practice and lifelong learning.
(White & Liccardi, 2006)
Learner Preference
Soft Pure
Soft Applied
• Synchronous discussions• Role play and games• Access to open web• Access to online journals • Support the development of
argumentation skills and critical thinking
• Qualitative, Open
(White & Liccardi, 2006)
What best supports novices?
Learning Readiness
Are learners ready for:
• Online learning?
• Technology mediated interaction?
• Self-regulation?
• New course designs?
• Independent learning?
Self-assessment
Learner Supports & Assessment
• Technical
• Access to online ICT services (Internet, email, server, CMS, etc.)
• Production (assignments, presentations, projects, etc.)
• Access to online academic resources (library, helpdesk, identifications)
• Learning technologies (study skills, time management, etc.)
Styles & SupportTech Implication Possible Support
Independent Portal, web site, portfolio, blog, L/CMS
FAQ, walk-in help, email, video tutorial
Dependent L/CMS, IM, email FAQs, help forum, phone help, walk-in help
Competitive Portfolio, blog, presentation tools
Mentor others, contribute to FAQ
Collaborative Discussions, chat, wiki, L/CMS, VOIP
FAQs, email, phone help, walk-in help
Avoidant Portfolio, VOIP FAQ, walk-in help, email, video tutorial
Participant Open forums, IM, VOIP, wiki Walk-in help, email, phone help
BREAK
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES AND FACULTY DEVELOPMENT
© Diaz, 2008
NoNoYesYes
Emerging Technology Use
Student and faculty surveys– Use of tools– Teaching approaches– Demographic information
(age, gender, years of study/employment, and program of study)
Student and faculty focus groups or observation– Classroom use of technology– Use of course management
systems– Preferences, limitations, and
needs
Document analysis– Annual reports– Lesson plans– Web pages– PowerPoint presentations or
course handouts can indicate areas of technology use and can reveal instructional styles
Web 2.0 and Affordances with Students
• Students are more comfortable with and have a tolerance for “figuring” out the technology
• Students can deal with trial and error approach to use and change in general
• Students have a broad exposure to a variety of different tools
© Diaz, 2008
NoNoYesYes
CharacteristicsType Focus
Expert Functions as knowledge expert and transmits information to learner who becomes more competent under the instructor’s tutelage.
Formal Authority Focuses on correct and appropriate procedures, serves as knowledge expert who is determined to provide necessary feedback to learner within a structured and standardized environment.
Personal Model Focus is providing personal examples and modeling appropriate and correct behavior.
Facilitator Teacher-learner interaction takes place in a probing and interactive learning environment. Supports learner’s decision within a consultant role.
Delegator Desire for learner to act autonomously with as little input as necessary.
SupportTeaching Style Preferred Approach Implied Support
Expert/Formal Authority (38%)
Dependent, Participant, Competitive
One-on-one, hands-on, reward/acknowledgement
Personal Model/Expert/Formal Authority (22%)
Participant, Dependent, Competitive
Hands-on, one-on-one, reward/acknowledgement
Facilitator/Personal Model/Expert (17%)
Collaborative, Participative, Independent
Small group or peer/mentor, hands-on, tutorial/reference materials
Delegator/Facilitator/Expert (15%)
Independent, Collaborative/Participant
Tutorial/reference materials, small group or peer/mentor, hands-on
Integrated Technology Adoption and Diffusion
Model
(Sherry, Billig, & Giiibson, 2000)
Web 2.0 and the Novice Faculty Member
• “Context-free features”
• Rules
• Self-monitoring
• Feedback and scaffolding
• Discrete and non-ambiguous examples
• Increasing opportunities for practice
© Diaz, 2008
WEB 2.0 CLASSIFICATIONSCommunicati
veTo share ideas, information, and creations
• Blogs• Audioblogs• Videoblogs• IM-type tools• Podcasts• Webcams
Collaborative To work with others for a specific purpose in a shared work area
• Editing/writing tools• Virtual communities of practice • Wikis
Documentative
To collect and/or present evidence of experiences, thinking over time, productions, etc.
• Blogs• Videoblogs• E-portfolios
Generative To create something new that can be seen and/or used by others
• Mashups• VCOPs• Virtual Learning Worlds
Interactive To exchange information, ideas, resources, materials
• Learning objectives• Social bookmarking• Virtual communities of practice • Virtual Learning Worlds
A Network of Support
– Tools not necessarily developed
for an educational audience
– No obligation to users
– Ever-changing
– Require separate
logins/accounts/fragmentation
– No centralized institutional support
(usually)
– Reliance on internet connection
(high speed)
– Lack of security
– Learning curve
– Variety of use and selection of
tools could overwhelm students;
lack of a common experience
across courses
– Intellectual property/copyright
issues
© Diaz, 2008
Instructional Technology Challenges
• The technology-adoption cycle
• Lack of integrated technology tools
• Learners’ changing expectations
• Institutional changes to technology commitments
Activity: Data, Data, Data
Part I
• Given examples of students and faculty members, how can you best support their utilization and integration of Web 2.0 technologies?
Part II
• Given your responses, what kinds of services are needed
• At institutional level?• At departmental level?
Part 3: Content, Pedagogy, Assessment,
and Tools Drs. Patricia McGee & Veronica Diaz
Individuals + BIG Picture
Interdependence
Backwards Design
Backwards Design Applied
EVIDENCE AS ASSESSMENT LEARNING PRINCIPLES
Encourage not only content achievement but assessment of perceived progress and attitude
Encourage not only content achievement but assessment of perceived progress and attitude
Track factors that may impede achievement
Track factors that may impede achievement
Biggest challenge?Biggest advantage/success?Liked the most?Liked the least?
√ Incorporate
meta-cognitive assessments
√ Provide a strategy for self-assessment and progress
√ Incorporate
meta-cognitive assessments
√ Provide a strategy for self-assessment and progress
Package objectives with assignments, activities, and products
Package objectives with assignments, activities, and products
When appropriate, use rubrics for consistent and aggregated indicators over time
When appropriate, use rubrics for consistent and aggregated indicators over time
Include learners in performance/ assessment measures
Include learners in performance/ assessment measures
R MR L
IP
IX
EARN
Pedagogical Frameworks
Instructional Foci
Bloom’s & Web 2.0Processes Tools Attributes
Remember Recognizing, recalling Visual/Text/Audio stimuli, selecting, feedback
Understand Interpreting, classifying, comparing, summarizing, explaining
Sorting, tagging, labeling, entering, selecting
Apply Executing, implementing Manipulating, entering, feedback
Analyze Differentiating, organizing, attributing
Selecting, grouping, altering, tagging, labeling
Evaluate Checking, critiquing Commenting, entering, responding
Create Generating, planning, producing Adding, generating, combining, publishing
Tool Characteristics
Tool Characteristics
ACTIVITY 1. Visit http://elearningtools.wetpaint.com
2. Become familiar with the site and prepare to complete an activity.
Web 2.0 Tools Affordances
Source: http://edorigami.wikispaces.com/Bloom%27s+Digital+Taxonomy
Source: http://edorigami.wikispaces.com/Bloom%27s+Digital+Taxonomy
Strategies for Online Assessment
• Group projects
• Students as audience and peer review
• Participation
• Rubrics
• Pre- and/or post testing
• Objective assessment • Subjective
assessment • Self-assessment • Interactive
assessments
ACTIVITY1. Using a syllabus,
consider which tool or tools can be used to meet instructional needs
2. Design an instructional experience with an assessment
3. Post to http://elearning-design.pbwiki.com
Instruction + Assessment
Wrapping up & thank you!
• Patricia A. McGee, PhD• Patricia.mcgee@utsa.edu• Associate Professor/2003 NLII Fellow• Instructional Technology• Department of Educational Psychology• University of Texas at San Antonio
Veronica M. Diaz, PhDdrvdiaz@gmail.com
Instructional Technology ManagerMaricopa Center for Learning and Instruction
Maricopa Community CollegesAdjunct Professor, Northern Arizona University
Recommended