Hybrid Learning Wilu 2010
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Hybrid Learning Wilu 2010

on

  • 587 views

Presentation given by Andrea Cameron & Jennifer Cyr at WILU 2010

Presentation given by Andrea Cameron & Jennifer Cyr at WILU 2010

Statistics

Views

Total Views
587
Views on SlideShare
586
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://www.linkedin.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Hybrid Learning Wilu 2010 Hybrid Learning Wilu 2010 Presentation Transcript

    • Concordia University pilots a credit information literacy course WILU 2010, May 12 Presented by Andrea Cameron & Jennifer Cyr
    • SEL197A
      • 2009/2010 Concordia libraries provides credit course to 800 “at-risk” students
        • Fall term: 500 students, 12 instructors, 8 weeks
        • Winter term: 200 students, 8 instructors, 8 weeks
      • Moodle used to create “hybrid” learning experience and manage project
    • Outline
      • What we did
      • How it went
      • Where we’d like to go
    • Hybrid Learning
    • Benefits of CMS
      • Practical
        • Inexpensive
        • Easy to use
        • Time saving
      • Pedagogical
        • Addresses multiple learning styles
        • Helps to create a learning community
    •  
    • Course Structure
    • Introducing Moodle
      • Homepage
    • Introducing Moodle
      • Homepage
    • Communication tools
      • Contact page
    • Communication tools
      • News forum
    • Administrative tools
      • Grade book
    • Administrative tools
      • Student grades
    • Activities
      • Worksheets
    • Activities
      • Group activities
    • Activities
      • Discussion forums
    • Activities
      • Quizzes
      • What the literature says
      • What the students say
      • What the teachers say
    • What the literature says
      • Create a community of learning
      • Encourage constructive learning
      • Engage a range of learning styles
        • Aural, visual, kinesthetic
        • Global, sequential
        • Activist, reflector, theorist, pragmatist…
      • Encourage deep thinking (synthesis)
    • What the students say
          • “ This is a great course that I believe every student should take when starting undergraduate studies ”
          • “ It’s been a great experience”
      “ I’m glad that I have taken this course. I learned a lot that I think will help me tremendously”
      • Most important thing I learned from this course….
      • Most popular responses…
        • Change structure of course
          • Shorten course
          • Lengthen course
        • Increase depth of course
          • More discipline specific
        • More activity based
          • More hands on
      • Suggestions to improve this course…
      • “ I guess we could spend less time focusing on how to cite properly, and more time learning how to actually find the sources which are relevant”
      • Suggestions to improve this course…
      “ The course focused too much time on basic searches and not enough time on databases” “ More activities – perhaps more in-lab assignments” “ More discipline specific assignments”
    • Test Scores
      • Pre-test and post-test results (20 questions)
      Test design and analysis by Nadine Anderson Skill Area Percentage Improvement Developing Topics 20.10% Finding & Using Books and Articles 34.90% Evaluating Research Sources 20.87% Citing Research Sources 100% Awareness & Avoidance of Plagiarism 32.41% Research Cycle & Information Formats 32.30% Overall improvement 33.08%
    • What the teachers say
      • A lot of work!
      • At-risk students have unique needs
      • Students have discipline-specific needs
      • Grades matter
      • Redevelopment and more redevelopment
    •  
    • Challenges
      • Time management
        • Balancing library priorities
        • Administrative support
        • Hiring TAs
        • Efficiency vs. creativity
      • Facilities management
      • Student management
        • Choosing a pilot group
        • Student needs
    • Next steps
      • Increased activity-based learning
      • Increased student-to-student communication
      • Increased asynchronous, e-learning
    • References
      • Allan, B. (2007). Blended learning: Tools for teaching and training . London: Facet Publishing.
      • Bowles-Terry, M., Davis, E. & Holliday, W. (2010). “Writing information literacy” revisited: Application of theory to practice in the classroom. Reference & User Services Quarterly . 49 (3).
      • Daugherty, A & Russo, M. (2007). Information Literacy Programs in the Digital Age: Educating college and university students online . Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries
      • Henrich, A. & Sieber, S. (2009). Blended learning and pure e-learning concepts for information retrieval: Experiences and future directions. Information Retrieval. 12. 117-147.
      • MacDonald, J. (2008) Blended learning and online tutoring: Planning learner support and activity design . Burlington, VT: Gower.
      • Olapiriyakul, K. & Scher, J.M. (2006). A guide to establishing hybrid learning courses: Employing information technology to create a new learning experience, and a case study. Internet and Higher Education. 9 , 287-301.
      • Vaughan, N. (2010) A blended community of inquiry approach: Linking student engagement and course redesign. Internet and Higher Education. 13 , 60-65.
      • Weetman-DaCosta, J & Jones, B. (2007). Developing Students’ Information and Research Skills via Blackboard. Communications in Information Literacy. 1 (1), 16-25.
    • Questions?