• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
SMU CEHD Professional Development Webinar
 

SMU CEHD Professional Development Webinar

on

  • 1,547 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,547
Views on SlideShare
1,485
Embed Views
62

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

2 Embeds 62

http://www.scoop.it 61
http://www.alertize.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
  • Personalization and Collaboration Survey of the different media available to journalists and public relations people.   writing for print, the Web, TV/radio, public relations and advertising. How the newer technology will affect what and how they communicate, and how their audience will interface with them. Changes the ways of doing research for articles etc. Different Web 2.0 interfaces like RSS I am an Instructional Technologist (and social software evangelist) with DoITs Instructional Resource Center.   M.Ed. Instructional Design, GMU. My Master's project examined the inherent potentials of social software for online learning.  I looked at blogs, wikis, photo sharing, and social bookmarking tools. Almost everything I've learned about Web 2.0 I've learned informally online form other's blogs, wikis, etc. social networking. A goal of mine is to demonstrate that a person can master a content area just as well through informal self-directed online learning as through a formal academic program. 
  • I essentially summarize 2.0 by asking students: 1) what it is and then focusing on the idea of user-driven content to discuss the essence of it. 2) how they are using web 2.0 tools and talk about your experiences. Other students chimed to share their experiences. 3) ask the question what do they think “what caused web 2.0” -- leads to a discussion of all the tech infrastructure stuff about broadband, always-on, cheap, small fast electronics etc. 4) Show Skype, You Tube channel, Twitter, Facebook etc. 5) What is Web 3.0?
  • Add our ref here
  • Tools that facilitate communication and collaboration
  • You get the idea. To truly do Web 2.0, you must do something that absolutely cannot be done without the Web. It's as simple as that.
  • The tools have had a broad impact on all parts of society and education. Information / News gathering, “the fifth estate” EPIC 2015, http://epic.makingithappen.co.uk/
  • Information / News gathering, “the fifth estate” EPIC 2015, http://epic.makingithappen.co.uk/
  • Eureka! 10/02/09 GMU, 2007 you keep your copyright but allow people to copy and distribute your work provided they give you credit — and some other conditions you can specify, or you may offer your work with no conditions and choose the public domain

SMU CEHD Professional Development Webinar SMU CEHD Professional Development Webinar Presentation Transcript

  • 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
    • 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
  • Case Study -Twitter Back Channel http://search.twitter.com/search?max_id=4537262754&page=2&q=elifs09
  • Collections of Case Studies
    • Educause -- 7 Things You Should Know
    • Educause/ELI – Emerging Technologies and Practices section
    • Duke -- Case Studies on Web 2.0 Tools
      • Duke Web 2.0 Toolkit
    • Twitter Experiment by Dr. Rankin, Prof. of History at UT Dallas.
      • Comments: http://www.utdallas.edu/~mar046000/usweb/twitterconclusions.htm
      • The video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WPVWDkF7U8
  • Duke Case Studies Source: http://cit.duke.edu/help/consult/web20casestudies.html
  • Source: Educause Web 2.0 Tool Kit
  • Misc. Mason Web 2.0 Tool Kit or Faculty Blogs
    • Mark Sample, English Dept.
      • http://www.samplereality.com/2009/08/14/pedagogy-and-the-class-blog/
      • http://www.samplereality.com/2009/05/13/teaching-technologies-for-large-classes/
    • Dan Cohen
      • http://digitalcampus.tv/
    • Glenda Morgan
      • http://gmu-tac.typepad.com/
      • http://accidentalpedagogy.typepad.com/accidental_pedagogy/web-20/
  • Resources for TLT2.0
    • In Plain English video series
    • Educause -- 7 Things You Should Know series
    • iTunes U
    • JISC
    • Classroom 2.0
  • Course Transformation
    • Start with a good foundation (base tool)
      • my tostada metaphor
    • You can add all sorts of fun widgets, mash-ups etc. but strong base tool
      • often a blog or a wiki
    • But start by looking at what others have done
  • Social Software-based Learning Environment -- Course Examples
    • My Examples
      • Course Blog - http://rickreo.onmason.com/edit772-module-3/week-2/
      • Course Wiki- http://edit575.wikispaces.com/
      • Course Startpage - http://www.pageflakes.co m/rreo/7151276
    • Other Examples
      • OpenEd Class
      • Connectivism and Connective Knowledge massive online open course (MOOC)
      • Econ Class Blog -- http://econ300.umwblogs.org/
  • Questions?? Turracher Schwarzsee (Austria) Source: Wikimedia Commons