Successfully reported this slideshow.
Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

Ongoing integration of digital communications into online courses

Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Loading in …3
×

Check these out next

1 of 35 Ad

Ongoing integration of digital communications into online courses

Download to read offline

This presentation explains how one instructor developed an approach to the ongoing integration of digital communications within online courses – using a cycle of testing, implementation, evaluation, and dissemination. Examples are shown from YouTube, wikis, badging, and virtual reality. Questions are posed for instructors considering such tools in their courses. A list of the author’s publications are included.

This presentation explains how one instructor developed an approach to the ongoing integration of digital communications within online courses – using a cycle of testing, implementation, evaluation, and dissemination. Examples are shown from YouTube, wikis, badging, and virtual reality. Questions are posed for instructors considering such tools in their courses. A list of the author’s publications are included.

Advertisement
Advertisement

More Related Content

Slideshows for you (20)

Similar to Ongoing integration of digital communications into online courses (20)

Advertisement

More from Eileen O'Connor (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Advertisement

Ongoing integration of digital communications into online courses

  1. 1. Eileen O’Connor, Ph.D. Eileen.oconnor@esc.edu March 2013
  2. 2.  Review of instructor course evolution, with increasing digital literacies –  The goal—to improve science-teacher education, especially online; to build communities of learners  A cycle with integration, testing, evaluation, improvement & dissemination – ongoing & generative  Several focusing themes:  Needing to map to the emerging world and live of digital natives; ultimate K12 learners  Expanding digital-literacy science teaching – and assessing via video  Helping adult learners in changing times – addressing uncertainty . . . and making quality, open work  Highlighting – YouTube / Wikis / Badging / Virtual
  3. 3. Explore new technology - • Ie. YouTube; digital probes Disseminate Integrate into • Conferences & online or f2f publications • Align w/ course • Slideshare – hist. objectives Digital ethnography NOTE: community • Holistic study of the building is an course • IRB - process objective
  4. 4. Online can be more than simply text & discussion boards Visual learning; dual coding theories; multiple intelligences; multi-lingual; information processing (brain based); 21st century skills
  5. 5.  To close the gap-move beyond writing proxies (aka lesson plans) in science teacher education  Students were required to demonstrate a tech-in-science use related to their lessons and to share with class  Instructor could review equipment, presentation style, and competency . . . in addition to written planning documentation  Colleagues – learned from and about their peers
  6. 6. Value to using YouTube, in general Easily • Accessible to most students • Useful especially with online; improves student & implemented teacher communication “Performance” • Many facets can be studied • Richer assessments possible since live materials can can now be be readily reviewed observed • Data can be saved, stored, compared over time New ways of • New questions arise about what is evidence of teaching & learning in the content area learning emerge
  7. 7.  Instruction?  Sharing?  The―technology‖ is easy – but how do you direct and assess a performance?
  8. 8. HOW CAN “WORKING TOWARDS PUBLIC SHARING” IMPROVE TEACHING & LEARNING? Teams developed support wikis / votes on what to go public . . . and why Communities of practice; situated learning; Vygotsky & social aspects of learning; 21st century skills
  9. 9. The assignment Plan & create wiki w/ team process Final vote of Anonymous peer publication ready assessment Some made Instructor revisions evaluation Peer comments circulated
  10. 10. Instructor Evaluation of wiki Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Coverage & Well covered Adequate Well covered Well covered quality coverage K12 applications Well explained Poorly explained; Well explained Well explained or background background info little info about info K12 Formatting (not Excellent: Fair: multiple Good: multiple Poor: one long an evaluation multiple pages; pages; images pages; images page; infrequent criteria) images used well; used though used well use of images internal links some were too large Grade given 98% 82% 94% 94% Students’ comments: Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Clarity & quality 4.4 out of 5 3.9 out of 5 4.5 out of 5 3.8 out of 5 Usefulness 4.5 out of 5 4.5 out of 5 4.8 out of 5 4.2 out of 5 % think public 85% 62% 92% 69% ready
  11. 11. Students comment on team work – some have misgivings % (#) The team was supportive, in general 77% (10) Working as a team improved over time 77% (10) The team provided help with topic 46% (6) Team provided help with organization of wiki 38% (5) Would have worked differently alone 31% (4) Would have worked better if alone 23% (3) Students who said they were “nervous” about working 23% (3) in this format “Everyone has different ideas and are working on different ideas so sometimes the page seems disjointed or the team is not working at the same pace.” “At first, I thought working with a team would be a breeze because I would not have to bear the entire workload and the different perspectives would make the wiki better. As the assignment wore on I realized the difficulties of working with team members.”
  12. 12. • School endorsement? Ongoing updating? Web issues Professional presence? • No longer simply content provider Instructor • Orchestrating / managing timetable & process; review liaison role shifts • Involvement in the thinking/learning process • How do you evaluate the complexities of a Valuing / process when the standard is “the paper”? • Do students and institutions truly value this assessing type of work? • Useful content created; a legacy HOWEVER • Greater involvement & professionalism • Incorporating & modeling future ways of learning
  13. 13. So, how might you use peer- reviewed wikis/websites to improve instruction?  What topics / assignments would you have students share with the public?  How would you ensure quality?  Again, the technologies are the easy part – what do you want to do and how will you manage & assess?
  14. 14. Establishing peer reviews – with badges – can increase interest & distributed learning Motivation theories; Vygotsky & peer support; distributed learning; 21st century skills
  15. 15. Grad course •Create, model, make criteria, require, assess •Elect which stays Revisions /review Dean award •in later Grad course •Ensure follow- up Badges: ongoing / generative •for input, continuity, and ownership
  16. 16.  REAL connections with & support for science (Cornell; www.globe.gov; www.nasa.gov)  Science literacy; science sharing; extending & creating new knowledge and understanding; helping other nations
  17. 17.  During an Emerging Technology course students award badges to Prezi, Facebook, Websites, YouTubes and such as they are being created to meet course objectives;  Models a new approach that these students might use in their future;  Adapt and adopt as moving through course needs and requirements;  More at SUNY Conference in Instruction & Technology May 2013
  18. 18. -- Encourage reflection around course criteria? -- Provide evidence of outside- the-course accomplishments? -- Ensure learning from others?
  19. 19. Where, how, & why can virtual realities create more engagement, ownership, context, & community?  With infinite applications (you design the environment), immersive learning makes: ◦ distance more “real” Community of practice; motivation; context & ◦ the impossible, possible visualizations; simulations; 21st century ◦ caring more apparent skills
  20. 20. MAT Science Center – meetings & presentations and, meeting the Dean
  21. 21. Students across the state give virtual presentations
  22. 22. Posters: presented to the class & to judges (former students) > votes too
  23. 23. Teaching others, across the state or the world  Individual support to faculty members . . . who can now present their areas of expertise to your online students
  24. 24.  From a development & fun six months with the Mall of the Universe  to SER/VE (the project on the next pages) ◦ Students developed a shopping mall economy
  25. 25. These middle school students created sophisticated interiors
  26. 26. An animated co-instructor helped with the weekly requirements – AKA, DaddyDarren Denver
  27. 27. For the final presentations
  28. 28. Overall:  Many ways to develop, create, meet, and share in virtual reality;  ESC has had virtual holdings since 2004;  NOTE: you can tape a virtual meeting – machinima How could you and your students meet, share, and visit? How can seeing an avatar & context make a distance community more real?
  29. 29. In closing  Digital closes gaps, preserves interactions, extends across time and geography, empowers multiple learning styles;  Experiment, experiment, experiment  Assess, assess, assess  Share, share, share Please contact me for more info – eileen.occonnor@esc.edu
  30. 30. Selected peer-reviewed publications and a book chapter O’Connor, E.A. (2013). Next generation online: advancing learning through dynamic design, virtual and web 2.0 technologies, and instructor attitude. (in press, Journal of Educational Technology Systems). O’Connor, E. A. (2012). Developing effective online collaborative science projects by using course scaffolding, a virtual world, and web 2.0 technologies. In Proceeding of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2012 (pp. 2192-2198). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Abendroth, M.A., Golzy, J., & O’Connor, E.A. (2012). Self-created YouTube recordings of microteachings: their effects upon candidates’ readiness for teaching and instructors’ assessment. Journal of Educational Technology Systems. 40(2), 141- 159.O’Connor, E. A. (2012). A survival guide from an early adopter: how Web 2.0 and the right attitude can enable learning and expansive course design. Journal of Educational Technology Systems. 40(2), 194-209.; O’Connor, E. (2011). Practical considerations when using virtual spaces for learning and collaboration, with minimal setup and support. In H. H. Yang, & S. C. Yuen (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Practices and Outcomes in Virtual Worlds and Environment. Hershey PA: IGI Global. O'Connor, E. (2011). Migrating Towards K12 in Virtual Spaces: Second Life Lessons Learned as Higher Education Meets Middle School Students. In Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2011 (pp. 2192- 2198). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. O’Connor, E. A. (2010- 2011) The effect on learning, communication, and assessment when student-created YouTubes of microteaching were used in an online teacher-education course. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 39(2), pp. 135-154. O’Connor, E. (2010). The Use of a Wiki in Teacher Education: How Does Learning and Instruction Change When Work Can Go Public?. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2010 (pp. 2822-2829). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. O'Connor, E. A. (2009). Instructional and Design Elements that Support Effective Use of Virtual Worlds: What Graduate Student Work Reveals about Second Life. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 38(2), 213-234. O’Connor, E. A. and Sakshaug, L. (2009) Preparing for Second Life: Two Teacher Educators Reflect on Their Initial Foray into Virtual Teaching and Learning, Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 37(3), pp. 259-272. O'Connor, E. (2008). Becoming a Virtual Instructor: How Can Higher Education Faculty Prepare for Second Life?. In G. Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2008 (pp. 1144- 1149). Chesapeake, VA: AACE; O'Connor, E. A. (2008). Initial Study of Pre-Service Teachers' Comments on a Reality-Based, Urban-Student Video Streamed within an Online Course. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 37(2), 139-157. Oconnor, E. (2007). Using Reality-Based, Authentic Streamed-Videos and Online Conversations to Prepare Pre-Service Teachers for Urban Classrooms: A Pilot Study. In T. Bastiaens & S. Carliner (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2007 (pp. 1179-1184). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. O'Connor, E. A. (2007). A Case Study of the Approach to Teaching and to Technology of Three New Teachers in an Alternative Teacher Certification Program. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 35(3), 357-382.

Editor's Notes

  • For example, the instructor was able to get a very good perspective on the technology and science-lesson skills of the student.
  • Instructors can not simply give the assignment and then return and grade a finished product; the teacher is now involved in the outcome and the way it can / might look to the world ; I didn’t put my name on the finished product

×