VCCS NH'10: Refining Course Management Systems: Listening to Those Who Do It and Use It

1,380 views
1,326 views

Published on

How do users use content and collaborative systems? Does using a CMS imply certain pedagogies? Presenters will examine the natural teaching and instructional workflow of users as they interact with a collaborative course management system and how it compliments or conflicts with using a CMS. Three perspectives will be examined: instructional designers, instructors, and graduate/teaching assistants.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,380
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Does using a CMS/CLE imply or impose certain pedagogy? (Amber) "3 perspectives presented: ISD, Instructors, GTAs and how CMS may imply pedagogies." Discuss the (in progress) research we are doing and what we've discovered thus far.  Amber is leading this presentation.  Amber and/or Sam is responsible for info about implied pedagogies, the info about the collected summaries (what we have done and learned so far), and info about what Contextual Inquiry and Goal-Directed Design research is.  Teggin will be unavailable to present. Accidental Pedagogy: Faculty teaching is improved through the use of the CMS, but this is a side effect of the use of the software rather than a direct result of its use. Quotes from pg. 4 of Morgan, G.
  • "3 perspectives presented: ISD, Instructors, GTAs and how CMS may imply pedagogies." Discuss the (in progress) research we are doing and what we've discovered thus far.  Amber is leading this presentation.  Amber and/or Sam is responsible for info about implied pedagogies, the info about the collected summaries (what we have done and learned so far), and info about what Contextual Inquiry and Goal-Directed Design research is.  Teggin will be unavailable to present. Does using a CMS/CLE imply or impose certain pedagogy? (Amber) Toolbox or Trap? Course Management Systems and Pedagogy ( Lane, 2008, EDUCAUSE Quarterly, vol. 31, no. 2 (April--June 2008)) Course Management Systems and Pedagogy (Lane, 2007) Lane conducted surveys of Blackboard/WebCT, Moodle, and other CMS users
  • The research thus far (Amber) Sakai community still collecting interview summaries for personas that are missing or are incomplete (i.e., ISD), although all other personas have been created (see PPT attachment ) and their " Requirements Definitions " are being drafted by the team at Stanford. Eight institutions, 30 interviews 20 instructors, 3 instructional staff, 3 undergraduates, 4 graduates 2 students, 2 instructors representing courses completely online
  • “ Requirements Definition” Creating problem and vision statement Identifying persona expectations Constructing context scenarios-- ”describe the broad context in which usage patterns are exhibited and include environmental and organizational considerations.” Identify requirements : action, object, context Problem Set Creation Describe the assumptions, steps, and process
  • This Slide and Notes are credited to Keli Aman and Jackie Mai from Stanford University. Chikako does it all: creates and deploys activities, gives detailed feedback to freeform response Terry reedits autograded problem sets from multiple reviewer, deploys, deals with problems Bob conceptualized all activities and runs an online class and gives feedback, but creation is done by Amanda Amanda is only involved in creation of activities--randomized tests, modules 8 persona for Instructor and staff Types of learning activities used in class: variations in form, purpose, & peer involvement What they are involved in : plan the schedule and flow of the course; or just involved in activity creation, manually evaluate student work, or monitor submission status and grades Small variations in attitude towards technology
  • This Slide and Notes are credited to Keli Aman and Jackie Mai from Stanford University. Denise reviews freshman students papers and drafts, gives lots of feedback Landon teaches upperclassmen and grad students, works with 2 graduate teaching assistants, including Irina Irina does all the grading of student papers and participation in discussion. Jan runs a practicum, where nursing students work in a clinic. Students are required to keep a weekly journal. 8 persona for Instructor and staff Types of learning activities used in class: variations in form, purpose, & peer involvement What they are involved in : plan the schedule and flow of the course; or just involved in activity creation, manually evaluate student work, or monitor submission status and grades Small variations in attitude towards technology
  • This Slide and Notes are credited to Keli Aman and Jackie Mai from Standford University.
  • This Slide and Notes are credited to Keli Aman and Jackie Mai from Standford University.
  • VCCS NH'10: Refining Course Management Systems: Listening to Those Who Do It and Use It

    1. 1. Refining Course Management Systems: Listening to Those Who Do It and Use It <ul><li>Presented by </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Amber D. Evans </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Teggin Summers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Samantha Blevins </li></ul></ul><ul><li>April 7, 2010 </li></ul>
    2. 2. Topics <ul><li>Introduction </li></ul><ul><li>CMS/CLE & Pedagogy </li></ul><ul><li>Research Design </li></ul><ul><li>Research Progress </li></ul><ul><li>Conclusion & QA </li></ul>
    3. 3. CMS/CLE & Pedagogy Amber D. Evans
    4. 4. Does using a CMS imply or impose Pedagogy? <ul><li>Glenda Morgan (2003) found: </li></ul><ul><li>CMS use is on the rise, </li></ul><ul><li>Important goals for faculty included “supplementing lecture materials, increasing transparency and feedback” </li></ul><ul><li>Instructors “reported that their communication with students increased as a result of using the CMS,” </li></ul><ul><li>“ Accidental Pedagogy” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Faculty look to a CMS to provide organizational tools. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Using these tools causes faculty to “rethink and restructure their courses” (pg. 4) </li></ul></ul>
    5. 5. Does using a CMS imply or impose Pedagogy? <ul><li>Lisa M. Lane (2007, 2008, 2009) reported: </li></ul><ul><li>Most users used CMS for course administration. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Communication, Lecture materials, Email, Gradebook </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Length of CMS time didn’t change their use. </li></ul><ul><li>CMS encourages novice instructors to &quot;plug in&quot; their content under the appropriate category. </li></ul><ul><li>Student-centered tools were “added as ‘features’ (some at additional cost) that simply make a heavy program even heavier” (para. 5, 2007). </li></ul><ul><li>Novice Web users suffer the most. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Unaware and “inclined to utilize only the aspects they understand from a non-web context” (screen 4). </li></ul></ul>
    6. 6. Does using a CMS imply or impose Pedagogy? <ul><li>Lisa M. Lane (2009) asks: </li></ul><ul><li>“ Today’s CMSs can be customized, changed and adapted, so why aren’t faculty tinkering with them in an effort to make their individual pedagogies work online?” </li></ul><ul><li>We at VT and in the Sakai community ask: </li></ul><ul><li>Why can’t we tinker with the CLE in an effort to make faculty pedagogies work online? </li></ul>
    7. 7. Research Design Samantha Blevins
    8. 8. Research Design: Purpose <ul><li>Contextual Inquiry </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ethnographic interviewing technique </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gathers qualitative data </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Combines interviews and observation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Takes place in interviewee’s work setting </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Based on master-apprentice model of learning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Observing and asking questions about what they are doing and why </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Discovery process instead of evaluation </li></ul></ul>
    9. 9. Research Design: Purpose <ul><li>Four phases to Contextual Design Interview </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Traditional Interview </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Overview of interviewee’s work </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Establish trust with interviewee </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The ‘switch’ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>To master-apprentice relation </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Observation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The interviewee “runs the show” </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Summarization </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Interviewer summarizes what they learned to the interviewee </li></ul></ul></ul>
    10. 10. Research Design: Purpose <ul><li>Goal of contextual inquiry </li></ul><ul><ul><li>To provide evidence for goal-directed design </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>User-centered methodology </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Allows research team to create composite user personas from the collected data </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Created personas can be used to determine when a common need can be met by either common or different interfaces </li></ul></ul></ul>
    11. 11. Research Design: Purpose <ul><li>Our overall goal is to help improve the next generation of Sakai (known at Virginia Tech as “Scholar”) </li></ul><ul><li>Interviews were conducted with </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Teaching Assistants </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Instructors </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Staff </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Students </li></ul></ul>
    12. 12. Research Design: Procedures <ul><li>One, 60-minute interview with observation notes </li></ul><ul><li>Interviews were audio-taped </li></ul><ul><li>Two researchers were present </li></ul><ul><ul><li>One to conduct the interview </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>One to take notes and observe </li></ul></ul>
    13. 13. Research Design: Procedures <ul><li>Notes of the interview were then turned into summaries </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Summaries were used to create the user personas </li></ul></ul><ul><li>The audio-recordings are currently being transcribed </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Transcripts will then be coded for major themes </li></ul></ul>
    14. 14. Research Progress Amber D. Evans
    15. 15. Sakai Community <ul><li>http://www.sakaiproject.org/ </li></ul><ul><li>Over 160+ institutions </li></ul><ul><li>This project is being lead by the User Experience staff at Stanford University. </li></ul><ul><li>Completed all persona compositions </li></ul><ul><li>Created Activity Requirements & Framework for how to structure, setup, and assess </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Assignments, Grading / Feedback </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Still collecting info about instructional designers. </li></ul>
    16. 16. VT Contribution <ul><li>At VT we conducted 9 interviews </li></ul><ul><ul><li>4 Instructors, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1 Graduate Teaching Assistant, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>2 Students (1 Graduate, 1 Undergraduate), and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>2 Instructional Designers. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Currently summarizing the personas for the Instructional Designers. </li></ul><ul><li>Next steps: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Build out the personas </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Create “Requirements Definition” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Problem Set Creation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide process to Sakai Developers </li></ul></ul>
    17. 17. Examples & Samples Amber D. Evans
    18. 18. Instructor/Staff: Problem Sets Chikako Nakamura Japanese instructor Terry Heinlein Majors Bio coordinator Bob Murphy Online Math Professor Amanda Harper Instructional Tech Associate
    19. 19. Instructors: Writing Denise Garza Freshman Writing Lecturer Landon Jones Associate Professor, Philosophy Irina Nemkova Graduate Teaching Assistant Jan Nelson Nursing Practicum Instructor
    20. 20. Review submission status Review individuals Activity deployment Course planning Activity creation Activity creators Activity evaluators
    21. 21. Review submission status Review individuals Activity deployment Course planning Activity creation
    22. 22. References <ul><li>Example Instructor/Staff processes and workflow slides are credited to Keli Aman and Jackie Mai from Stanford University. </li></ul><ul><li>Lane, Lisa M. (2007). “Course Management Systems and Pedagogy.” LisaHistory.net website. Retrieved 28 February 2009 from http://lisahistory.net/pages/CMSandPedagogy.htm </li></ul><ul><li>Lane, Lisa M. (2008). “Toolbox or trap? Course management systems and pedagogy.” EDUCAUSE Quarterly 31(2). Retreived 31 March 2009 from http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazineVolum/ToolboxorTrapCourseManagementS/162865 </li></ul><ul><li>Lane, Lisa M. (2009). “Insidious pedagogy: How course management systems impact teaching.” First Monday, 14(10). Retrieved 6 April 2009 from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2530/2303 </li></ul><ul><li>Morgan, Glenda. &quot;Faculty use of course management systems.&quot; Educause Center for Applied Research, 2003. Retrieved 1 May 2007 from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERS0302/ekf0302.pdf </li></ul>
    23. 23. Thank you! <ul><li>Questions? </li></ul><ul><li>Contact Information </li></ul><ul><li>Amber D. Evans [email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>Teggin Summers [email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>Samantha Blevins [email_address] </li></ul>

    ×