Category Archives: 4.3 Reflection on Practice

Candidates analyze and interpret data and artifacts and reflect on the effectiveness of the design, development and implementation of technology-supported instruction and learning to enhance their professional growth.

December 7, 2017 · 9:14 pm

Try this on for size: Online teaching and the adult learner


(Public domain vintage painting of people working in a tailors shop. http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=76581  CC0 License.)

 

Education is not a “one size fits all” enterprise. There is a lot of customization that takes place. Such is the case with adult learners. During the course of the fall semester, I have been challenged to think about online education for adult learners in my EDTECH 522 class from Boise State University. I learned about best practices in adult learning and andragogy, the study of the methods and principles used in teaching adults, which gained popularity because of the work of Knowles.  Wikipedia has a good entry on this topic. You can read more about it here. I also spent a lot of time working with various technologies, evaluating them for use in online educational settings for adults, and exploring their use through the creation of practical artifacts. I also took time to actively and deeply reflect on my experiences in using these technologies and the impact they had on me as an educator. You can read my other blog posts here: “Mine” place? Or Yours?”   If you build it, will they learn?  Agency and Persistence in Online Education. It has been a rewarding educational journey so far, with time to consider to essential questions concerning my own ideas about teaching adults in online environments related to the literature.

My thoughts in this post turn to two specific questions. First, “What technological knowledge have you learned in this course? What pedagogical knowledge have you learned in this course?” I have gained a substantial amount of knowledge about technology, both about technology itself and its application in educational settings, during this course. I learned how to evaluate online courses using established course rubrics such as the one developed by Quality Matters. Through using this course assessment tool, I have learned how to create my own rubrics for analyzing and evaluating online courses. I used Camtasia  for video editing and created a rich media tutorial. (I have used SnagIt, another Techsmith product. It is basically Camtasia-Lite. I used it to record screencasts, but I never did much post-production editing.) With this knowledge and experience, I will be able to make video tutorials for students that are interesting and engaging, as well as educational. I also used Canvas, a Learning Management System, or LMS (by Instructure), to develop a fully online, robust, multi-module course on copyright issues in higher education for college professors. It is fair to say that I picked up a lot of technological knowledge.

What about pedagogical knowledge? Again, the learning experience for me was rich and rewarding. I learned about andragogy, as mentioned above, the methods and principles used in teaching adults. My professional background is technical and subject specific. I have a high-tech background and was trained as a professional librarian in a Master of Science program. I do not have a teaching certificate. My one formal opportunity to learn about “teaching methods” came from an Educational Psychology class I took in college over 25 years ago. That class was focused primarily on K-12 education, so the main concepts taught had pedagogical (the teaching of children/adolescents) concerns. It was exciting for me to rediscover the research behind learning theory. I was especially impressed by the subtle differences between pedagogy and andragogy and the specific needs that adult learners have. I plan on providing learning activities that are engaging and authentic. The readings from Stavredes, especially those concerning the persistence of adult learners in online environments, were fascinating and encouraged me to build empathy for my students and to work to express that care in online communications.

The second question is this: “Explain how your learning in this course will make an impact on your current or future work. Will any artifacts you created be shared with your students or colleagues?”  The learning I have experienced in this course has already had a positive impact on my current work. I expect it will continue to have an impact in the future. Currently, I am working to polish the copyright crash course for college professors so I can deploy it on our campuses instance of Canvas. I intend to use it for new faculty orientation and as a refresher course for current faculty. I plan on making a formal proposal to the VPAA/Dean of the Faculty at my college with a recommendation that the course be included as part of the continuing education materials for the faculty. I also plan on using what I have learned to develop a copyright course/library orientation for students that is a blended course (one which has both a physical classroom and online component). We will move into a new library with a dedicated library teaching lab and abundant technology in the spring. I plan to use the space for inaugural instruction sessions using the course I created. My strategy will be to use the online course to create a Community of Inquiry that expands beyond Canvas into the physical space on campus and beyond.

In addition to learning how to use Canvas for online course delivery, I also learned how to use other online tools that can be used to populate courses with customized content. For example, I learned about Quizlet. I know, Quizlet? Really?? That’s old news. Perhaps it is old news to all of the K-12 folks out there, but I had not heard of Quizlet until this course. I was exposed to a whole new world of online assessment because of this class. I expanded my learning by exploring other online quizzing tools such as Socrative, Quizizz, and Mentimeter. I will be working with these tools to design formative assessment tools that I can use when delivering both face-to-face and online library instruction. It is pretty exciting!

Overall, I really enjoyed my learning experience in EDTECH 522. The student-student interaction was lively, challenging, and supportive. I learned new material and learned how to use old tools in a new way.  I look forward to using my newly acquired knowledge to help others learn and grow in the digital realm. One size definitely does not fit all, but with proper knowledge and planning, I am confident that I can create and support online learning environments for adults where they can learn and grow.

 

References:

Stavredes, T. (2011). Effective Online Teaching: Foundations and Strategies for Student Success. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Leave a comment

Filed under 4.3 Reflection on Practice, Uncategorized

November 20, 2017 · 6:54 am

If you build it, will they learn?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/Kaufman_field.jpg
(Kaufman Field, Evan Featherolf. www.upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/kaufman_field.jpg)

Allow me to be honest: I am not much of a baseball fan. I know, know. How can I be a true, All-American male if I do not have a love for America’s game? Beats me. I tried playing baseball when I was a kid.  My parents put me in both tee ball and Little League. I wanted so bad to be a hitter. Or a catcher. Something. I ended up being coached to just look tough and not swing at the ball. Oh, and I got to play left field. A lot. I just wasn’t cut out to be a big league slugger. That did not stop me from enjoying the game from time to time. I have been known to take my boys to more than a few bush league games and to watch the World Series. It also did not keep me from developing an appreciation for baseball in popular culture. Take the film Field of Dreams. The quotes from this 1989 Kevin Costner vehicle stick with me. The most famous of these quotes is most likely, “If you build it, he will come.” This quote came to me while I was reflecting on my latest EDTECH522 project, the development of an online lesson.  My mind worked on that phrase and turned it into “If you build it, will they learn?”

The question, you will notice, is not “If you build it, will they come?” because they most certainly will come. A report released in 2015 by Learning House found that, of the 18.6 million students enrolled in college in 2015, around 5.5 million were studying online to some extent, either fully or partially (page 5). That equates to roughly 30% of college students. That is just college students. This number does not take into account the number of high school students enrolled in online courses via concurrent credit or dual-enrollment. The students are most definitely coming to online education. But are they learning? And how can I, as an educator with training in the design and delivery of online education, facilitate the learning process?

These are some questions that I found myself facing as I reflected on my experience in designing and creating my online course. I utilized ideas from the readings in my EDTECH 522 class to help formulate a plan to develop the course. First, I considered a topic that I had good reason to believe would be of interest to adult learners. I talked to my coworkers and settled on a class on copyright for faculty at the school where I work. It is an area that is complex and in constant flux. It is also a topic of high interest among the members of the faculty.

The second concern was making sure that I ensured the learners would be successful in engaging with the material. I utilized techniques that would create a high degree of presence in the class. This included deliberate measures to facilitate student-content, student-student, and student-instructor presence. In order to foster interaction with the content, I created authentic assignments that encouraged students to actively play with the course material. I provided students with the opportunity to create artifacts with Web 2.0 tools they could use with their students later on (virtual magazine covers on public domain and an electronic poster on copyright factors).  I came back to readings from Stavredes on building a community of inquiry.  I also provided multimedia content to encourage engagement with the course content. I took guidance from Baldwin & Ching and incorporated graphics and pacing to draw students into a learning story. The modules were possibly not a pure form of “interactive storytelling.” However, I drew inspiration from their writing nonetheless.

Third, I used what I have learned about rich media tutorials to create effective and engaging instructional videos for the class. I took guidance from Ruffini and created a personalized PowToon animated video introduction to the course.  The video helped to establish my presence in the class as the instructor and to begin building toward a community of shared inquiry. I also employed other strategies to engage the students in the course. Class discussions provided for the students to build social and cognitive presence. The course is neatly organized and humanely paced in order to allow adequate time to process concepts, interact with other learners, and engage with the instructor.  I also followed the visual design principles of CARP (contrast, alignment, repetition, and proximity) in order to create a welcoming and accessible learning environment. One major decision I made early on was the choice to use Canvas instead of Moodle. The school at which I work uses Canvas exclusively, so I knew it would be important to use the learning management system with which the learners would be most familiar and expect to use in the future.

The most difficult challenge I encountered while creating this course was keeping the technology from getting in the way of the learner. Every design decision I made had kept the learner at the center. I constantly asked myself, “How will this decision help the learner achieve the course learning objectives?” While this was a very real challenge, the focus on the learner also kept me from getting distracted by the bells and whistles of technology.  The one problem I ran into was a small irritation: Canvas kept trying to automatically embed a YouTube video that the rights holder had disabled so that it could not be embedded.  I checked the customer support area for Instructure/Canvas and found the answer I needed right away. Canvas was very easy to use. To be honest, I experienced very few problems.

I have taken many online classes over the years, going back to 2003. During that time, online education has changed dramatically. The development of Web 2.0 tools has been a huge boon to those involved in online education and I have been in the thick on online education the whole time. That said, I have never created an online class from scratch before.  It was an enlightening experience. There is a great degree of planning that has to take place prior to course launch. The online environment does not allow for on-the-fly adjustment and winging it that can take place in a face-to-face classroom. Prepare. Prepare. Prepare. And then prepare some more. This led to the most rewarding aspect of the project, which was receiving positive feedback from classmates who reviewed the course. Receiving critical feedback that affirmed my design choices and course content was incredibly fulfilling.

So, I can build it. And, if I continue to use sound andragogical principles and instructional strategies, the students will learn. And that is a home run.

 

References:

Baldwin, S., & Ching, Y. (2016). 5 Features to turn your online course into interactive storytelling. eLearning Industry.com.  https://elearningindustry.com/5-features-turn-online-course-interactive-storytelling

Clinefelter, D. L., & Aslania, C. B. (2015). Online college students 2015: Comprehensive data on demands and preferences. Louisville, KY: The Learning House, Inc.

Ruffini, M. (n.d.). Screencasting to Engage Learning. EDUCAUSE Review online. http://er.educause.edu/articles/2012/11/screencasting-to-engage-learning

Stavredes, T. (2011). Effective online teaching: Foundations and strategies for student success. Jossey-Bass.

2 Comments

Filed under 4.3 Reflection on Practice, Uncategorized

September 30, 2017 · 7:46 am

“Mine” place? Or Yours?: Social Media Tools and Building Presence in Online Courses

https://i0.wp.com/img15.deviantart.net/e21e/i/2016/134/f/0/medieval_village__large_house_by_spasquini-da2f9dt.png

Medieval Village: Large House. By spasquini https://spasquini.deviantart.com/art/Medieval-Village-Large-House-608732993

My boys love Minecraft. Well, at least they did when they were younger. Now they enjoy playing it with their little sister. Minecraft, if you are unfamiliar with it, is an online virtual world that can be played in different modes, the two most common being survival and create.  The point of the game is to “dig, build, and survive” (in survival mode).  The game delights in its pixelated graphics, an homage to early gaming culture (think Mario Bros. and Pac-Man).  Creators take great pride in creating elaborate mazes, fantastical structures, and replicas of actual buildings. My boys would spend hours designing precise floorplans for their homes and bases in Minecraft. I wish I had Minecraft to play with when I took drafting and mechanical drawing in high school. As I ventured through the course materials for the most recent module of the adult online learning class I am taking at BSU (EDTECH 522) I kept thinking of Minecraft.

Let me tell you why.

Module 3 in EDTECH 522 tackles the topic of online learning tools, which take advantage of Web 2.0 technology. Web 2.0 is not a standard per se, but refers to the shift from static pages to dynamic content. Think Facebook, Twitter, blogs, Pinterest, YouTube, and all those other apps and sites that enable the easy creating and sharing of information. These are fun, engaging, and exciting tools that help us connect to family, friends, coworkers, and strangers all at the click of a button and the typing of some keys. Educators seeking to innovate and provide learning environments for their students in the digital age (or the information age, if you prefer) use these same tools for educational purposes. They intentionally use the same tools used by your grandmother to share cat videos and your uncle uses to tweet about the Cubs to create educational content and support learners in online classes. So what does this have to do with Minecraft? Educators must be as thoughtful in planning and developing online classes, including the online tools they will use, as Minecrafters must be in building their amazing structures. Sure, anyone can go into create mode in Minecraft and mine away with abandon, but it takes focus, vision, and a plan to create a fine building with complex mazes, trapdoors, and hidden chambers. The same is true for educators developing and working in online classes.

Part of the planning for this module, from the student perspective, required substantial reading from two books: Chapters 11-14 in Stavredes’ Effective Online Teaching Foundations and Strategies for Student Success and Chapters 6 & 9 in Ko & Rossen’s Teaching Online: A Practical Guide 4th ed. The chapters from Stavredes focus on building a community of inquiry model as it is applied to online learning environments. Stavredes focuses on the concepts of cognitive presence, which “is developed when learners share their multiple perspectives to construct knowledge” (107), social presence, which “establishes learners as individuals and, through the process of relationship building, allows learners to engage in a community of inquiry” (131), and instructor presence, which is the manner in which the instructor interacts with the learners directly, the example the instructor sets for the class, and the processes the instructor establishes for the facilitation of communication among the course participants. As Stavredes states, “(t)he quantity, timeliness, and quality of (instructor) interactions with learners are critical to helping them persist in the course and achieve the course outcomes” (151). Stavredes also provides practical guidance on how to achieve success in bringing merging these three forms of presence. Ko & Rossen offer more practical details. All of which prove quite valuable in navigating the whys and hows of constructing and online course. I found all of this information to relevant to my coursework for the week: Evaluating a social media tool and considering its value in online education.

I chose to review and evaluate Quizlet, a popular online flashcard application. As I worked through the assignment, I thought about my online learning experiences going back to the late 1990s. I would have loved to have an app like Quizlet to help me study for Microsoft certification exams. Later on, when I was taking classes in library and information science, I would have been very grateful to have access to the same app when studying information access and retrieval and the history of librarianship. I could see how the flashcard app, with its customizable cards (students can create cards, as can instructors. There is also a live mode that facilitates collaboration!) could be used to increase social (through creating and sharing personalized decks) and instructor (through instructor narrated/created decks for class) presence, and, to a lesser extent, cognitive (by using the decks to construct a meaningful study pack) presence, in an online class. I considered how a tool like Quizlet, and many others, could be integrated into Canvas, the learning management system (LMS) in use at my school, and other online course platforms. Ko & Rossen reminded me that I needed to become more aware of what Canvas can do and what software it supports. “While you can make a start with basic knowledge of you LMS or other tools available at your institution, a deeper familiarity is only gained from actual use” (138).  I cannot just grab a bunch of resources off the Internet, slap them into a Canvas course shell, and expect students to learn. I need to take a thoughtful, informed, measured approach to incorporating online learning tools into a well-designed digital classroom. The Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Framework, referenced in Stavredes (110-111), sets standards that can be used in order to help inform the creating of online courses that build deep presence. I found this discussion of foundational theory very applicable to my work as an educator, both online and face to face.  Also, if I want to have authentic learning experiences for my students in an online class, I can employ problem-based learning, which is described in detail by Stavredes. I thoroughly enjoyed reading about all of the practical measures proposed by both Stavredes and Ko & Rossen.

But what impacted me the most was Stavredes’ discussion of learner-to-learner discussion forum interactions. I was especially impressed by the work of Brookfield and Preskill and their description of the type of disposition learners should possess in order to engage in fruitful online discussions. The “dispositions include hospitality, participation, mindfulness, humility, mutuality, deliberation, appreciation, hope, and autonomy” (135). While I try very hard to practice this disposition (just good manners, right?) in my daily interactions with others, both online and face to face, I have seen that many people do not act in a similar manner. I understand, through the readings from Stavredes and others, that the it is incumbent upon the instructor to set this tone in the online class and, because of transactional distance, the space the student feels in the online environment, it can be difficult to do. Thankfully, with the appropriate and thoughtful use of social media tools, I, as an instructor, can build a bridge (much like my boys used to do in Minecraft) that spans the transactional gap and eases the participation of the learners on their journey as a community of inquiry.  Hopefully, we can move from “mine” place and your place to our place in our online learning communities.

 

References:

Ko, S., & Rossen, S. (2017). Teaching online: A practical guide. Taylor & Francis.

Minecraft. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minecraft

Quizlet. www.quizlet.com

Stavredes, T. (2011). Effective online teaching: Foundations and strategies for student success. Jossey-Bass.

University of Louisville, Delphi Center. Ideas 2 Action: Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Framework. http://louisville.edu/ideastoaction/about/criticalthinking/framework.

Web 2.0. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0

 

1 Comment

Filed under 4.3 Reflection on Practice

Tagged as , , , , , ,

September 3, 2017 · 7:46 pm

EDTECH 522 Reading Reflection: Agency and Persistence in Online Education

Persistence
Image credit: Flickr user bdunnette. Creative Commons license.

Agency and Persistence in Online Education

The following post addresses to topics from my EDTECH 522: Online Teaching for Adult Learners class. The interconnected topics are:

  1. Where are you on the Grow’s Staged Self-Directed Learning Model described in Ch. 2 of Stavredes? What is the implication of this model for you as an online teacher?
  2. Discuss challenges that affect learners’ persistence in online course and relate these challenges to your own online teaching or learning experiences.

Persistence. As a resident of the Intermountain West, this term conjures up images of rugged mountain men, pioneers in wagon trains, and roughnecked railroad workers. These are the men and women who built the cities in which we currently live. As a parent, persistence reminds me of my children and the time they spend learning new skills. Whether it is getting that coloring page just right, or stacking the block tower just a tad bit higher, or playing that video game level one more time in order to beat the boss at the end, these all exemplify persistence. Persistence is also found in schools, where students are presented with professionally crafted learning opportunities designed to stimulate the brain and foster academic growth. These opportunities can present very real challenges for students as they grapple with the material, especially if they are more authentic in nature. In a face to face classroom, when the going gets tough, the student can seek help from the teacher or aide, who can, by their physical presence provide an immediate sense of support and encourage the student to persist. In an online environment, the challenge to persist can be much more difficult. In a 2016 report for the American Society for Engineering Education, Ferdousi references persistence and retention statistics between undergraduates in traditional classes versus those in online classes. According to the research, the “student dropout rate for online undergraduates ranges from 20% to 50%, which is 10% to 20% higher than traditional classroom environments” (2). How can we understand student behavior and support them? It will help to reflect on my own personal development as a learner as I consider my role as an instructor in online learning.

One factor that affects student persistence in online learning environments is a student’s development along Grow’s Staged Self-Directed Learning Model (SSDL). Grow’s proposed model presents four levels of self-direction which can be influenced by instructors in order help students develop through the stages and become more self-directed learners. Stavredes provides a detailed explanation of the SSDL model in the book Effective Online Teaching: Foundations and Strategies for Student Success. The stages of SSDL are 1) Dependent learner; 2) Interested learner; 3) Involved learner; 4) Self-directed learner. Each stage represents the amount of instructor support required by the learner. As the learner develops more agency, the need for instructor diminishes. At the Dependent learner stage, for example, the learner “has little prior knowledge in the subject, is unsure of the focus of his or her learning, and has low self-confidence and motivation” (15). At this stage, the instructor is regarded with high authority. As the learner moves to the second stage, the interest in learning increases even though prior knowledge remains relatively low. The instructor assumes a role as more of a motivator through the learning process. As the learner moves to the third stage, the instructor’s influence lessens further, while student autonomy grows. In the fourth stage, the student has developed skill and knowledge in the content area, and is confident, motivated, and capable. The instructor role evolves into one of consultant or course guide (16-17).

So where am I on along Grow’s SSDL model? In the area of online teaching and learning, I rank myself solidly in the fourth stage of development. I am a self-directed learner. I have been taking online classes off and on since 2003. I successfully completed a fully online master of science degree in library science in 2006. In 2005, when I started my first job as an academic librarian, I began supporting students in fully online programs across multiple disciplines (MSW, MBA, Religion, and Education, to start). I received mentoring from a skilled Instructional Designer and Educational Technology Director. In time, I was invited to a seat on the E-learning Committee, where we evaluated programs and initiatives. I worked my way up the higher education ranks and was granted tenure at my current institution, where I hold the rank of associate professor. The MET program at BSU is my second masters level program. I am a highly motivated and self-directed student. I persisted through life, work, and educational challenges. Good for me! However, I realize that not everyone is like me. I need to be aware of where the learners I work with are at on Grow’s SSDL model so that I can appropriately support them and make the educational process accessible to them. This means designing classes in ways that provide the maximum opportunity for students to develop and grow. I need to constantly evaluate my work as an online instructor and take student feedback seriously so I can revise courses or assignments accordingly. My willingness and ability to provide rich learning environments that are thoughtfully and appropriately crafted with the student in mind will provide the support they need to help them persist.

Stavredes and others also write about challenges that affect the persistence of students through their programs of study. It is important to note a distinction between retention, which measures an institution’s ability to retain students from entrance to degree completion and graduation. Persistence is internal to the student. According to Stavredes, “(p)ersistence refers to learners’ actions as they relate to continuing their education from the first year until completing their degrees” (22). For example, a student could transfer to another institution and complete their degree. This would adversely affect the university’s retention rate while positively impacting the student’s persistence rate. A student’s inability to persist, and by extension, remain with the institution (retention) has many costs. Tinto (2006) observed that the costs to the learner extend to lost time, financial expense, and a loss of self-confidence. The impact is not isolated to the learner; the institution is also adversely affected by students who fall into this category.

Research has been conducted on the persistence of both traditional and nontraditional/distance education learners. In seeking to understand distance or online education learners, Stavredes focuses on two models: The Bean and Metzner Persistence Model; and the Rovai Composite Persistence Model. Bean and Metzner’s model, developed in 1985, is a bit dated. Rovai’s model is nearly twenty years newer and is much more applicable to understanding learners who take online classes. Both, however, provide valuable insight into the challenges faced by online learners. First, students have stressors outside of the control of the institution. These include finances, family, and work, among others. Rovai further breaks down barriers to persistence into pre- and post-admission categories. Pre-admission variables include student demographic information and the skills they posses. Post-admission variables include external factors such as finances and life crises, and internal factors such as study habits and learning style (26). Willging and Johnson (2009) summarized that the reasons why students choose not to continue in online education environments are “complex, multiple, and inter-related” (4).

I face the many of the challenges that confront other online learners. I have substantial work pressure. We are building a new library and I am supervising the move to the new building in January, 2108. I also have regular work duties to attend to and have to assume new tasks since one of our employees retired suddenly this summer and another staff member is on maternity leave. Plus, the start of a new academic year is stressful. Fortunately, my family life is quite stable. That is not to say there is not stress. My wife is enrolled in a doctoral program, my eldest son is a college freshman, and our grade-school age daughter has some developmental challenges. I also have aging parents. I am also active in my church and community. While I enjoy participating in community life, the activities do require an investment of time and that cuts into the amount of time I have for school work. I am fortunate that I have solid computer skills and that my demographic profile bodes well for me as far as higher education pursuits go. That said, I am very empathetic to the needs of other learners. The awareness of the potential persistence barriers that others face will help me to be a compassionate and mindful instructor in online learning environments.

References:

Ferdousi, B. (2016). Addressing student persistence and retention issue in online classes. Proceedings of the 2016 ASEE North Central Section Conference. Retrieved at http://people.cst.cmich.edu/yelam1k/asee/proceedings/2016/faculty_regular_papers/2016_ASEE_NCS_paper_49.pdf

Stavredes, T. (2011). Effective Online Teaching: Foundations and Strategies for Student Success. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Tinto, V. (2006). Research and practice of student retention: What next?. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 8(1), 1-19.

Willging, P. A., & Johnson, S. D. (2009). Factors that influence students’ decision to dropout of online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(3), 115-127.

1 Comment

Filed under 4.3 Reflection on Practice, Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , ,