Responses to Module 6 -- Video Presentations

The learning community of Sarita Ivey, LeAnn Morris, and Sharmaine Sharusan met synchronously via Skype for 54:11 on Saturday, February 16, 2013 to present our videos to each other.  I provided feedback to Sarita and Sharmaine’s video posts on their blogs as we discussed:
Sarita Ivey -- http://iveylearninggarden.blogspot.com/
Sharmaine Sharusan --http://docshar.blogspot.com/
I also responded to the following three other video presentations for a total of five as required:
Martha Bless -- http://marthabless.posterous.com/
Lori Dodd -- http://loridodd.blogspot.com/
Allison Hill -- http://allisonsedtechviews.blogspot.com/

Module 6 - Video Presentation

This video is the final project for EDUC 8842 - Principles of Distance Education that requries a video presentation of introducing a keynote speaker at a professional distance education conference.  I introduce Dr. Michael Barbour, a leading expert in K-12 Distance Education and Online Learning Content as if he was going to be a keynote speaker at ISTE 2013 in San Antonio, even though he is not presenting there.

Responses to Module 5 Blogs

I responded to the following 8842 classmate’s blogs for Module 5:

Martha Bless -- http://marthabless.posterous.com/

Allison Hill-- http://allisonsedtechviews.blogspot.com/

Sharmaine Sharusan --http://docshar.blogspot.com/

Module 5: Moving Toward Dynamic Technologies Concept Map and Reflection

Concept Map:  Static versus Dynamic Technologies

       Based on my philosophy of distance education, I believe I am in the middle on the “static-dynamic continuum.” A few media and technology resources as identified on the above concept map are in the middle (Moller, 2008) and could be considered on both sides of the continuum, not just one side or the other. I believe there will continue to be a need to use tools and resources that are on the static end of the continuum. They serve a purpose and are simple to use, such as email and delivery of certain content via the web. However, I am already moving to the dynamic side due to the many resources (Anderson, 2008) I have been introduced to thus far in this class. In addition are all the tools I have begun to use in my new position as the district Technology Integration Specialist that were not included in the concept map above: Animoto, Glogster EDU, Go Animate, Voki, SlideShare, Prezi, StoryBird, Diigo, Bubbl.us, and Common Sense Media.

References

Anderson, T. (Ed.). (2008). The theory and practice of online learning. (2nd ed.). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

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

Responses to Module 4 Blogs

I responded to the following 8842 classmate’s blogs for Module 4:

Martha Bless -- http://marthabless.posterous.com/

Lori Dodd -- http://loridodd.blogspot.com/

Sarita Ivey -- http://iveylearninggarden.blogspot.com/

Module 4 Graphic Organizer: Engaging Learners with New Strategies and Tools

 Engaging learners in an online environment requires utilizing new strategies and technological tools, as well as a new approach to the way teachers structure their classroom environment with interactive discussions and problem-based learning experiences for students with peer-to-peer interactions (Durrington, Berryhill, and Swafford, 2006).  In addition, the delivery of instruction by the teacher promotes a curator role of the learning, providing the appropriate level of interaction and guidance to help students utilize resources in a structured approach to learning (Siemens, 2008).
            The technological tools and strategies that can be brought into the educational process to involve learners in building content knowledge include providing a syllabus to outline the course schedule and expectations, along with rubrics and assignment expectations presented in a clear, focused manner, utilizing a social networking like environment such as Blackboard, Edmodo, Moodle, or Schoology.  In addition, the teacher must establish their “teaching presence” (Shea, Li, Swan, and Pickett, 2005) as a facilitator of learning (Moller, 1998) and provide access to content material such as the Khan Academy, TED-Ed and Learning.com. 
            Engaging students in communication with peers and teachers encourages students to develop their “social presence” (Swan and Shih, 2005) in an online learning environment through the use of blogs, wikis, Skype and email.  Teachers will encourage student participation using these technological communication tools by providing timely feedback on all class work and creating a supportive, open and respectful learning environment.  In addition, opportunities to work on authentic, problem-based tasks that will enhance student collaboration in an online environment include establishing a learning community, creating cognitive presence, and encouraging student generated discussions and projects using Google+ or Microsoft SkyDrive.   

References

Durrington, V. A., Berryhill, A., & Swafford, J. (2006). Strategies for enhancing student interactivity in an online environment. College Teaching, 54(1), 190−193.

Moller, L.A. (1998).  Designing Communities of Learners for Asynchronous Distance Education.  Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(4), 115-122.

Shea, P., Li, C. S., Swan, K., & Pickett, A. (2005, December). Developing learning community    in online asynchronous college courses: The role of teaching presence. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(4), 59-82.

Siemens, G. (2008, January). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. ITForum.

Swan, K., & Shih, L. F. (2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online          course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3), 115-136. 

 

Assessing Collaborative Efforts

Module 3 Blog Post

            Effective strategies for creating, maintaining, and assessing collaborative online learning communities are the responsibility of both the instructor and the learners.  Participation in a collaborative learning community should be assessed fairly, equitably, based on contributions, and stated outcome metrics by the instructor and peers who provide feedback from within the community (Laureate, 2012).  The varying levels of skill and knowledge students bring to a course should not affect the instructor's "fair and equitable assessment" (2012) of learning because a learner-centered online classroom environment is the same as a face-to-face classroom (Palloff and Pratt, 2005) where as long the outcomes are met, the pathway to success will look different for every student.
            If a student does not want to network or collaborate in a learning community for an online course, the other members of the learning community should encourage the student by modeling “social presence” (Palloff and Pratt, 2007, p. 31) by acknowledging each other’s thoughts and feelings.  The instructor’s role in this situation is to support the open collaboration of students by clarifying the objectives and tasks, and defining clear expectations (Marcinek, 2011) that would reflect the impact of nonparticipation or collaboration on the assessment plan criteria as established in the course rubric.

References

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer).  (2012).  Assessment of Collaborative Learning.  Baltimore, MD:  Author, George Siemens.

Marcinek, A. (2011).  Importance of Collaborative Assessment in a 21st Century Classroom.  Andrew Marcinek’s Blog at Edutopia.  Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/collaborative-assessment-digital-classroom-social-media-tools

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

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