Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Week 4 wiki
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Week 4 wiki


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide
  • After project 2, team 2 disbanded. The higher the score, the better the quality.
  • The future holds for technology to be implemented and how it can stimulate online collaboration. Tools such as Wikis, Blogs, web 2.0, and simulations.
  • Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovation (5th ed.) NY: Free Press.
  • Transcript

    • 1. The Need for online collaboration…
      Walden University
      Tracy Snow
    • 2. Collaboration tools
    • 3. Collaboration Promotes
      Best practices
      Development of critical thinking skills
      Co-creation of knowledge
      Transformative learning
      Palloff & Pratt, 2005
    • 4. Need
      Instructors are always looking for ways to improve student interaction in classes. They understand that collaboration online is different than that of face to face. They may not have the necessary tools to make this happen successfully (Palloff & Pratt, 2005). Increasing opportunity for interaction is critical for online learning. Collaboration allows this.
    • 5. Research
    • 6. Ling Thompson and Heng-Yu Ku from Regis University and the University of Northern Colorado conducted a case study to investigate the relationship between the degree of online collaboration and quality of group projects. They needed to find our how important collaboration was to online learners as they work on group projects, and how belonging to a community is essential in a collaborative learning experience (Kirschner, 2004; Palloff & Pratt, 2005). Their findings were based on four teams working in groups and their interactions. It was based on four different characteristics: participation, Interdependence, synthesis, and independence.
    • 7. Results (project 1 & 2)
    • 8. Results (project 3&4)
    • 9. Development
    • 10. The problem that this innovation encountered was the disbandment of team 2. Two members quit, and the other 2 joined teams 3 & 4. The audience for this innovation is professors (teachers).
      There was no commercialization in this case study. For future studies, the need to implement technology will be investigated.
      Degree of online collaboration and team performance.
    • 12. Time line
    • 13. Timeline of collaboration tools
    • 14. Why Online Collaboration
      Working virtually is the next best thing that happened to us after the Fire and the Wheel. Working impeccably, across limitations, round the clock is the new way to work. Have you tried this way of working yet? I am talking about “’team work” and “collaboration”. So for teamwork to be effective, it’s important for individuals to adopt modern practices and technologies that help.
    • 15. Why Online Collaboration Tools
      Wherever you are, share your work in a simple and efficient way. This is where good online collaboration tools come in. If you’re contemplating adopting--or proposing the adoption of online collaboration tools, there are online collaboration benefits that may help you make a decision on this useful technology. Blogs, Wikis, and Skype are a few tools that enable people to communicate and collaborate online.
    • 16. Engaging Tools
    • 17. Engaging learners with tools
    • 18. Growth of Innovation S-Curve
    • 19. Five attributes of Innovation
    • 20. Relative Advantage
      The degree to which an innovation is perceived as being better than the idea it supersedes (Rogers, 2003). Online shopping has advantages over going to a store, driving in traffic, and waiting in lines.
    • 21. Compatibility
      The degree to which an innovation is perceived as consistent with the existing values, past experiences, and needs of potential adopters (Rogers, 2003). Windows 7 replaced an earlier version.
    • 22. Complexity
      The degree to which an innovation is perceived as difficult to understand and use (Rogers, 2003). There are some innovations that are complex, but full of opportunities.
    • 23. Trialability
      It helps to be able to try innovations before buying. While this isn't common for most innovations it can reduce any uncertainty the buyer might have about committing to a purchase and can increase the speed of diffusion.
    • 24. Observability
      When people can see an innovation being used, they are more likely to buy it. Examples are a car, homes, and computers. Innovations that are hard to see, diffuse slowly (
    • 25. Critical Mass
    • 26. Critical Mass
    • 27. References
      Palloff & Pratt (2005). Collaborating online: Learning together in community. San Franciso, CA: Josey-Bass.
      Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovation (5th ed.) NY: Free Press.
    • 28. References