Tools for Online Learning and Collaboration

This Discussion will provide an introduction to a variety of tools available for online learning and collaboration. Please complete the following:

Part 1: Toolbox Reflection

Read the list of tools presented in the Centre for Learning & Performance Technologies (2009) website linked below. Construct a list identifying the tools from the website you have used in a work setting and state the type of activity you were participating in with each tool (i.e., what purpose did it serve?). Additionally, identify the tools from the list that you have not used and state a workplace activity you might participate in with each. Finally, what tools are you using in your workplace for collaboration, specifically, that are not listed in the article?

Centre for Learning & Performance Technologies. (2009). 25 tools every learning professional should have in their toolbox. Retrieved from the C4LPT Website: http://c4lpt.co.uk/janes-articles-and-presentations/25-tools-a-toolbox-for-learning-professionals-2009/

Web browser – Yes a web browser is used for employee website, job postings and some hiring/training activities.

Social bookmarking tool – No, but it would be useful in introducing new company policies, events and updates to policies.

Blogging tool – No, but it could be used to introduce managers/executives to staff/personnel.

RSS/Feed reader – No, but it could be used to communicate emerging technologies in the shipping industry to keep management updated on the latest trends..

Micro-blogging tool –No, nut Twitter could be used to report changes in work schedules that arise out of emergency. It could also be used to give commendations to employees.

Email – Email is used to provide interview information..

Instant messaging – No, but it also could be used to relate last minute changes in work schedules in addition to addressing employees individually.

Personal productivity tool –No, but scheduling meetings and other events could be done with this type of tool.

Mind mapping tool – No. but it could be used to solicit employee feedback/input on existing production operation systems and add the input to managements mind mapping for possible correlation and strategizing .

Presentation tool – No, but Powerpoint could be used to present resume, work history, innovative ideas, etc. to employee.

Presentation sharing tool – No. but could also be used to share resume, personal information and present ideas to employer with audiovisual aid.

Online office suite –No, but I could use the tool to collaborate with other employees on drafting a list of grievances to be submitted to management concerning work conditions.

Web conferencing tool – No, but I could use it to present the list of grievances to employees for their approval before given to management..

Course authoring tool – No. but online classroom could be used for training purposes.

Screen capture tool – Yes, I have used screen capture, Jing, to present information from school endeavors to my job.

Demo/screencasting tool –Yes, I used screencasts to present my transcript and enrollment information to my job.

Web authoring tool –No. but I could use a website creation tool to set up an company review forum.

Wiki tools – No, but I could use Wiki to gather information from employees on grievances, suggestions and commendations directed toward the company.

Image/photo tools – Yes. Imaging is used to take pictures of work done properly vs poorly for training purposes in addition to proper vs improper methods.

Audio/podcasting tools – No, but I could use audio/.podcasting to direct employees on how to properly submit grievances.

Video tools –No, but video could be used to demonstrate how a job is to be done and the consequences of not doing it right in addition to conducting orientation/training.

Personal dashboard –No, but I could use Personal dashboard tools or start pages to streamline /document/ store information on employees for retrieval, review and reporting.

Social networking tool – No, but I could use social networking to reach co-workers with information concerning work schedules, events and policy changes. Basically, I could use

Facebook or Linked to network.

Integrated social media platform – No, but integrated social media platforms could be used to package digital resources for a comprehensive compilation of pertinent information concerning the work environment and advanced knowledge-sharing.

To the best of my knowledge there are no digital/technological tools that I use at work which are not listed in the above table.

Part 2: Evaluation of Tools using Twitter Adoption Matrix

From the tools that you identified in Part 1, select three and evaluate them using the Twitter Adoption Matrix presented in the following article:

Sample, M. (2010). A framework for teaching with twitter. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/blogs/profhacker/a-framework-for-teaching-with-twitter/26223

For example, is the tool “In-class back channel,” “pedagogical communication,” etc?

Technological tool integration into Twitter Adoption Matrix

MINDMAPPING ..Metacognitive/Reflective Activity

INSTANT MESSAGING…Outside of Class Discussions

RSS FEEDS…Tracking Activities..Pediological Communication

Part 3 :Collaboration Tool Research Review

Use our Ashford University Library to locate a peer reviewed journal article that explores the use of one or more of the online collaboration tools provided in the Centre for Learning & Performance Technologies (2009) list. Please refer to the following tutorials for guidance on conducting scholarly research at the Ashford Library:

About Scholarly Journals and Online Databases How to Conduct Research Using the Ashford Library

You should then use this article(s) to support your response in the weekly discussion. Please specify the database where you located the article(s) as part of your APA citation.

After reading the article, create a one to two paragraph summary that includes the following: Identify the tool the article explored Summarize the purpose of the article. Summarize the key points, findings, and/or conclusions presented in the article. Describe your reactions to the article – e.g., what are the strengths and weaknesses of the

study? To what extent do you predict the key points, findings, and/or conclusions of the article might influence the future of online learning and collaboration?

Include the full APA citation for the article consulted, including database from which the article was retrieved.

ResponsesThe article I chose is Factors Affecting Knowledge Sharing Among Esl Undergraduates

in Completing Collaborative Writing Tasks Using Wiki and Skype. Thus the tools discussed for purposes of online collaboration are Wiki and Skype. Wiki can be used to gather information from individuals pertaining to a certain topic, record the information and edit the information as necessary. Skype can be used for audiovisual communication/instruction/feedback through instant messaging and webcam services. The two tools can actually be used for the same project with Wiki as a database and Skype as the open line for asynchronous/synchronous communications. Hiew and Hoon (2014) state, “ thus, this study aimed to find out which factors affect students’ knowledge sharing in online collaboration, and to identify which CMC tools benefit or limit collaborative learning “ (p.46). Therefore, the purpose of the article is to explore what learning environment characteristics affect knowledge sharing and alternative means of online knowledge sharing and one’s merit as an teaching/learning tool.

The author stresses the intended takeaways from this article through statements regarding the learning environment dynamics and Computer-mediated communication (CMC). When

using CMC tools social interaction and knowledge sharing affected learning outcomes. CMC is effective for teaching English classes that may require collaborative writing. Skype was preferred over Wiki because of the ease of use/ access . Learning Management systems (LMS), Google Docs and Face Books are also viable CMC tools. A team leader should be assigned out of the group and the instructor must be aware that some students will catch on and learn faster than others. The studies strengths are the consideration of a social perspective in critiquing factors that affect learning and the introduction of social networks as a means of learning through online collaboration. The weaknesses in my opinion is the failure by the author to discuss how limitations- such as differing levels of technical competencies among learners -can be accounted for and minimized if not eliminated completely. My overall reaction to the article is that CMC tools are closely associated with Web 2.0 tools and articles/studies such as the one critiqued/summarized in this paper lead to and warrant further study and experimentation with web-based learning in group settings while advocating the present use of CMC tools on a trial/error basis. The articles is trending towards Web 2.0 tools as viable options for future advancements in online learning/knowledge sharing.

Hiew, Y., & Hoon, T. B. (2014). FACTORS AFFECTING KNOWLEDGE SHARING AMONG ESL UNDERGRADUATES IN COMPLETING COLLABORATIVE WRITING TASKS USING WIKI AND SKYPE. The English Teacher, 43(2), 46-62. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1626833202?accountid=32521