SMU CEHD Professional Development Webinar

Social Media U: Best Practices & Case Studies Teaching with Web 2.0 Tools Rick Reo, [email_address] Instructional Designer, GMU Adjunct Instructor, AIT & CEHD Source: Gartner

What We’re Going To Talk About

What is Web 2.0?

Why should you care?

How does Web 2.0 change how we do things?

Best educational practices

Web 2.0 tools & technologies

Backchannel Resources

Twitter hashtag: #cehdpw

--------------------------------

Rick’s Delicious tags: http://delicious.com/rreo/socialmedia

Rick’s ShareTabs: http://www.sharetabs.com/?smu-gmu

Rick’s Slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/rreo

What does Web 2.0 mean to

We know it when we see it? http://www.go2web20.net/

Social software is a subset of Web 2.0 and a continuation of older computer-mediated communication (CMC) tools such as IM, newsgroups, groupware, and virtual communities (Alexander, 2006; Rheingold, 2003, ¶4). Web 2.0 includes a broad range of web technologies, services, and tools, and refers to a renewed pattern of web technology adoption and innovation. Dabbagh, N., & Reo, R. (in press). Back to the future: Tracing the roots and learning affordances of social software. In M.J.W. Lee and C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Web 2.0-based e-Learning: Applying social informatics for tertiary teaching. Hershey, PA: IGI Global (formerly Idea Group, Inc.). CMC Social Software Web 2.0

Educational Social Software aka Web 2.0 Tools

ESS enable:

lower the barriers to participation and self-authoring:

web-based & easy-to-use

community-based & sense of ownership

increased capacity for working together

(communication, collaboration)

collectively change the rules of social interaction

personalization-- goals, interface,

“ networked tools that support and encourage individuals to learn together while retaining individual control over their time, space, presence, activity, indentity, and relationship. ~ Terry Anderson, Ch.9, p.227 Theory and Practice of Online Learning

User-Generated Content – media content, publicly available, produced by end-users

Architecture of Participation – the way a service is designed facilitates participation and promotes UGC.

Wisdom of the Crowds (Crowdsourcing) – leveraging the mass collaboration enabled by Web 2.0 technologies to achieve small goals/task or solve problems.

Network Effects & the Long Tail – large user base; value increases for everyone as new users join/participate

Data on Epic Scale – information collected indirectly from users and aggregated as a side effect of ordinary use of Google, etc.

Open-ness -- Web has a strong tradition of working in an open fashion

Six Big Ideas Behind Web 2.0 Anderson, Paul (2007). What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education. Tech Watch Report, JISC, http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/publications/twweb2.aspx

Web 2.0 Transforms Practice

Teaching 2.0

Learning 2.0

Library 2.0

Enterprise 2.0

Journalism 2.0

What do these changes mean for Higher Education?

Changes in the way we:

collaborate

communicate

provide content, services, or resources

Why you should care?

In the end, you don’t really have a choice: Embrace 2.0 technologies

most people are already social computing aficionados

that is what our student body is expecting

and what our mandates require with our limited resources and increasing demands.

Why Faculty Should Care?

students are using these tools

improve disciplinary communication and knowledge sharing / Professional Development

authentic learning opportunities

Why should you care?

Web 2.0 tools offer several benefits to instructors, including:

ease of use

interactions/integrations with other commonly-used tools

filling needs not currently met with other tools

inspiring creativity and exploration in teaching

authentic learning experiences

Downsides Source: Wired magazine

Copyright, Privacy, and Security

Copyleft Source: Reo Public Domain No rights reserved Unrestricted redistribution and modification Creative Commons licensing Some rights reserved Choice of restriction on redistribution and modification and Share-Alike Traditional Copyright © All rights reserved Exclusive restrictions on redistribution and modification

Source: Marta Kagan

Teaching & Learning with Web 2.0 Tools (TLT2.0)

Iterative instructional design

Traditional ID Don’t start with the technology. Think about your course goals first – what are you trying to do?

what are your needs, especially in terms of collaboration, content, and communication

then you can move to thinking about technology

Iterative ID Traditional ID + Web 2.0 tools simultaneously

tool affordances for users

Source: Sloan-C Web 2.0 Technology Selection Criteria Evaluate your possible tool choices using these criteria to eliminate poor choices quickly. Then, do more extensive testing to find that ‘perfect' Web 2.0 technology.

Criteria 1: Access

Is the tool accessible by Windows and Mac users?

Is the tool / product of tool viewable in a variety of web browsers?

Does the tool work well for those with dial-up connections?

Does the tool provide options that support ADA compliance?

Is the tool free?

Will the tool be around for a while?

Criteria 2: Usability

Do you have to create an account to use the tool?

Is the tool easy to use?

Does the tool have a robust and easy to use Help section?

Does anything have to be downloaded and installed on the computer to use the tool?

Criteria 3: Privacy & Intellectual Property

Does the tool allow you to restrict access of your work/your students' work?

Does the tool protect your personal data (e.g. email address given when account created)?

Does the tool allow you / your students to retain sole IP rights to the content you create?

Does the tool allow you to determine the copyright status of the content you've created?

Can you save a copy of the product to your desktop for archival purposes?

Criteria 4: Workload & Time Management

Does the tool make it easy to track student work (for grading purposes).

Does the tool support private and public commenting (for individual and group feedback)?

Does the tool provide for an RSS feed to track work via email or an RSS reader?

Is it possible to embed the tool into the LCMS you're using?

Criteria 5: Fun Factor

Does the tool allow you to be creative during the learning process?

Does the tool allow you to demonstrate creativity in the learning product?

Does the tool provide opportunities for different types of interaction (visual, verbal, written)?

Does the tool increase the perception of connectedness?

Does the tool encourage collaboration?

Social Software Use Continuum Dabbagh & Reo, 2010 Types of Uses Web 2.0 Tools Private Information Management  Open Resource Sharing  Social Networking Common Features Settings

Setup for private/personal use

Disable search engine indexing

Enable public view

Setup personal profile

Configure tool for resource sharing

Configure to pull in other people’s content or activity via comments, RSS feeds, etc.

Enable information “push” via subscription, follow, watch list, notifications etc.

Build tool-based communities / groups / collections

Employ promotional activities or send invitations

Setup multi modal, two-way communication pathways

Blog (including microblogging)

Use as private online journal

Create multimedia blog posts

Enable Blogroll

Dynamic access to related/recommended content, e.g., Trackback

Enable comments, Trackback , RSS feeds

Add blog to RSS aggregation services – e.g., Technorati

Stimulate social connectivity via micro interactions features.

Wiki

Use as private content management space

Password protected collaborative document editing & commenting

Open collaborative document editing & commenting

Enable view history

Provide user statistics

RSS Reader (Bloglines, Google)

Private news/ media feed archive

Enable personal archive sharing

Network with like minded subscribers or discover content via recommendations

Social Bookmarking (delicious)

Private bookmark archive

Personal and collective tagging

Create/join user networks to access other people’s links

Use group tags; bundle tags

Social Media (Flickr, YouTube)

Set-up private media archive or channel (consume only)

Create/add media content and apply Creative Commons licenses

Create/join public user groups or channels

Start Pages (iGoogle, PageFlakes)

Private multiple media information management web pages built on widgets.

Enable subscriptions

Invite / enable group or open editing of content

Social Networking sites (MySpace, Facebook)

N/A – public view / personal social information sharing enabled by default

Add contacts, friends, etc.

Enable two-way communication features via comments, subscription, notifications, chat, or wall graffiti

TLT 2.0

Course integration 1

supplement Bb course with Web 2.0 course assignments

Wikipedia, Google search, blog etc.

Course integration 2

augment Blackboard courses by embedding Web 2.0 tools

Course transformation

“ Small pieces loosely joined” approach

Case Study -Twitter Experiment by Dr. Monica Rankin, UT Dallas

Problem

Large lecture class (90) - wanted to find a way to involve students in the materials via discussions

Solution

Twitter posts short messages that can be posted in real-time (with mobile devices via texting as well as via Web-based tools on laptops/netbooks.

Setup

Course Twitter account, hashtags, Tweetdeck, how-to training, factor down time for trial and error use

Good Practices

Experimented with strategies for producing constructive discussions

Twitter most effective when it was combined with other discussion strategies (small group discussions, Interaction with instructor, time to process as an entire class) also organize discussions by topic, needed TA to monitor Twitter stream on computer and respond to questions

Conclusion

Twitter did not replace more conventional discussion formats; instead, it enhanced the discussions and brought more student interaction

http://www.utdallas.edu/~mar046000/usweb/twitterconclusions.htm

(Implement only, assessment not factored in here) Adoption Assessment Tool Twitter as Learning Tool -- Levels of Educational Use Twitter is defined in a course context as a light-weight micro blogging platform used to support micro interactions and social networking in the service of student community building, discussions, tracking & reporting, metacognition and a variety of spontaneous learning activities Prepared by Rick Reo on behalf of DoIT/LSS, 9/09 Active Passive In-class Back Channel for Discussion Used to support ad hoc class discussions or lecture commenting (use hashtags to categorize real-time, on-task chatter/texting (M.Sample) Good for monitoring key points in a discussion, collating viewpoints

Outside of Class Discussions

Used to collate classroom views

Setup topics with separate twitter accounts or hashtags

Students initiate and/ or follow topics and participate in discussion per instructor protocols asynchronously.

Good for community building, discussions, assignments

In-class Directed Discussion ( Rankin style )

Open question/topical discussion format

Use semi-anonymous Twitter stream of comments to lead discussions (

Twitter aggregates and collates student responses to separate webpage

End of class large group processing

Optional step to analyze aggregated content (could be used as makeup assignment for missed class)

Good for engaging all students in discussions in large lecture classes (monitoring key points, collating viewpoints)

Lightly Structured Activities (low threshold) Follow some instruction and Tweet about it

gather course feedback

ambient office hours

poll class (e.g., identify an object (D.Cohen)

Tracking Activities

find and follow instructor, experts, topics

Feedback Activities

language or writing practice

Metacognition/Self-regulation

Student activity to share resources and report on self learning events like difficult topics, interesting applications etc.

Muddiest point

One thing I learned most (S.Klein)

Institutional communication channel (outreach, alerts etc.) Instructor communication channel (e.g., announcements, reminders) Broadcast course links and share resources

Case Study -Twitter Experiment (cont.)

Pros

find a way to engage students in the materials via discussions

Cons

Messy

Not sustainable

Good Practices

Experimented with strategies for producing constructive discussions

Twitter most effective when it was combined with other discussion strategies (small group discussions, Interaction with instructor, time to process as an entire class) also organize discussions by topic, needed TA to monitor Twitter stream on computer and respond to questions