834-12.docx

Course: Educational Technology (834)
Semester: Autumn, 2019
Assignment No. 1
Q. 1 Explain educational technology in your own words. How can educational technology be
helpful in training and education of distance learners
Educational technology is a field of study that investigates the process of analyzing, designing,
developing, implementing, and evaluating the instructional environment and learning materials in
order to improve teaching and learning. It is important to keep in mind that the purpose of
educational technology (also referred to as instructional technology) is to improve education. We
must define the goals and needs of education first and then we use all our knowledge, including
technology, to design the most effective learning environment for students.
Instructional technology can also be seen as a process of solving educational problems and
concerns, which might include motivation, discipline, the drop-out rate, school violence, basic
skills, critical thinking, and the whole list of educational concerns. First, the problem is identified,
an analysis of the factors of the problem is made, and possible solutions to the problem are
presented. Then, the student population and the curriculum are analyzed. The next step is to select
the most appropriate instructional strategies for the particular situation. Next, instructional
materials and resources are selected that are suitable for the curriculum and the mode of instruction
chosen. Finally, the program is implemented, evaluated, and revised as needed in order to meet
the stated goals for school improvement.
The learning materials today have greatly expanded because of the various technological advances.
Instructional materials include more conventional materials, such as the blackboard, overhead
projectors, televisions, VCRs, overhead projectors, slide projectors, and opaque projectors, as well
as newer materials, such as the computer, various software applications, LCD projectors,
camcorders, digital cameras, scanners, the Internet, satellite, interactive TV, audio and video
conferencing, artificial intelligence, and so on.
Teachers in the public schools and faculty at universities need to understand what types of
materials are available, how to use them, why they should be used, when they should be used, and
how to integrate them into the teaching/learning environment in order to meet the ultimate goal of
improving education. Teachers also need to seriously consider how these newer materials can
affect what and how we learn and teach.
The issue of what these materials are and how to use them is a first step. But we must quickly
begin to discuss how these materials should be used and how they affect the curriculum and

instruction in our schools. Technology can be used to perpetuate a teacher-led, knowledge-based
learning approach or it can be used to help us implement a student-centered, constructivist, and
progressive approach. We need to help teachers to understand the bigger picture of how technology
can revolutionize education. Just teaching teachers how to use the technology will lead to
enhancing a knowledge-level educational system. Teaching them the real potentials of technology
will lead to promoting higher-level thinking, independent learning, and life-long learning.
The skills and issues that need to be addressed by teachers are vast. To help in understanding what
these skills and issues are, the Coordinator of Educational Technology at UNCA has created a list
of items regarding educational technology. These are items that the faculty at the universities need
to understand so that they can incorporate them into their own teaching and thus help preservice
teachers understand them so that they can more effectively utilize technology in their own teaching
as well.
Remember, in all of these areas of educational technology that the goal of improving a specific
aspect of teaching and learning comes first. The technology is selected to help us meet these goals.
Software Tools
Word processing, database, spreadsheet, telecommunications, presentation, authoring, graphic
paint programs. Teachers need to know how to use them, how to teach them to students, and how
and why to use them in the classroom.
Software Types
Drill and practice, tutorials or computer-based instruction, and simulations. Teachers need to know
what these are as well as why, when, and how to incorporate them into their teaching.
Integrated Learning Systems
Also known as computer-managed instruction. Teachers need to know what this is, how to use it,
when to use it, with what grade levels and subject areas to use it, with what students to use it, and
its role in the educational process.
Equipment Use
Digital camera, scanner, camcorder, CD-writer, computer, modem, printer, VCR, LCD projector,
laser-disc player, and others. Teachers need to know how to use them and how they can be used
in the classroom.
Multimedia Integration

Create and find graphics, images, audio files, video files, and animations. Import these multimedia
objects into their presentations and learning materials. Understand how and why the integration of
multimedia helps them to teach and how it helps students to learn.
Audio and Video Conferencing
Understand what these are and how to incorporate them into the educational process. Understand
various teaching methods that best utilize these tools. Understand how these can affect how we
learn.
Distance Education
Understand what it is, types of instructional delivery systems and media to be used (i.e., self-
instructional manuals, slides, satellite, videotaped instruction, interactive TV, and the Internet),
how to design courses using distance education, the differences in this type of learning and
teaching, techniques for delivering instruction in this method, and why and how this approach can
be used at various grade levels.
Classroom Configurations
How to best equip and utilize technology in the classroom. How to use the technology in the
classroom. Classrooms need multimedia technology in each classroom. Teachers need access to
teaching computers, LCD projectors, scanners, and other equipment in the classroom. Teachers
need to be able to quickly use this equipment and access software when needed. Teachers need to
be able to access and display the Internet and know how to utilize the Internet, software programs,
presentation software, videotapes, and so on, in their teaching methods. Classrooms also need
software and equipment available to their students.
Q. 2 What are characteristics of learning? How can teachers make their teaching effective
with the help of learning theories?
Faculty members in higher education are involved in many instructional design activities without
formal training in learning theories and the science of instruction. Learning theories provide the
foundation for the selection of instructional strategies and allow for reliable prediction of their
effectiveness. To achieve effective learning outcomes, the science of instruction and instructional
design models are used to guide the development of instructional design strategies that elicit
appropriate cognitive processes. Here, the major learning theories are discussed and selected
examples of instructional design models are explained. The main objective of this article is to
present the science of learning and instruction as theoretical evidence for the design and delivery

of instructional materials. In addition, this article provides a practical framework for implementing
those theories in the classroom and laboratory.
ALMOST ALL FACULTY MEMBERS who teach in higher education as subject matter experts lack
formal training in the science of instruction and instructional design, even though they routinely
design instructional materials. That is, faculty members are involved in instructional design
activities that mostly lack scientific underpinning and proper documentation (13, 25). In contrast
to subject matter experts, instructional designers are formally trained to use several instructional
design models that have been developed for systematic planning and the development of
instruction. These systematic processes in designing instruction are aimed at increasing
instructional efficiency and facilitating student learning. In that respect, design models translate
the general principles of learning and instruction to provide a procedural framework for developing
instructional materials and creating an environment for successful learning outcomes.
Although there are many different design models available, all of them include the following
essential phases of instructional design: analysis, design, development, implementation, and
evaluation phases. The designer's main task is to perform instructional analysis to determine
instructional goals, develop instructional strategies, and develop and conduct an evaluation to
assess and revise instructional materials. Like instructional designers, faculty members also use
aspects of instructional design. They consider the program objectives to identify their session
objectives, develop learning activities to reach these objectives, and assess learners' progress
toward achieving those objectives. However, faculty activities in planning educational experiences
or designing educational investigation should be guided and supported by the science of learning
and instruction.
The main objectives of this article are to present the theoretical evidence for the design and delivery
of instructional materials and to provide a practical framework for implementing those theories in
the classroom and laboratory. Three sections are included to present the science of learning and
related learning theories, the science of instruction, and a framework for implementation.
The Science of Instruction
Based on an understanding of how people learn, the science of instruction is concerned with the
rational development of instructional design strategies. Effective design of instructional materials
elicits appropriate cognitive processes in the learner and mediates more successful learning
outcomes.

The principle of instruction.
Five principles of instruction have been identified (31) that promote learning: 1) learners are
engaged in solving real-world problems, 2) existing knowledge is activated as a foundation for
new knowledge, 3) new knowledge is demonstrated to the learner, 4) new knowledge is applied
by the learner, and 5) new knowledge is integrated into the learner's world.
These principles can be implemented using different delivery/teaching methods to create effective
learning environments. The first principle emphasizes problem-centered instruction or involving
students in real-world tasks. For effective instruction, problems should be relevant, interesting,
and engaging (14), and there should be a progression from less complex to more complex problems
(36, 44). In the second phase of activating previous knowledge, prior mental models or schema are
activated to promote instructional effectiveness. Simply put, to avoid overwhelming students who
lack foundational knowledge, provide them with relevant experience to be used as a foundation
for the new knowledge (17). This step is often ignored by faculty members who assume all students
have similar educational backgrounds, although admission committees try to diversify the student
body by accepting qualified students of different backgrounds. In the third demonstration
principle, information is presented to the learners. In this phase, we'll discuss basic educational
theories for effective instructional strategies and give examples of instructional design models that
could be used to guide the design and development of instructional materials. The fourth phase is
to apply learned knowledge in different authentic situations and to provide feedback for guidance.
For example, in a medical school setting to teach basic sciences including physiology, it is
important to provide the clinical relevance for the basic science information and explain important
relationships. Thereafter, provide students with different clinical scenarios to apply what they have
learned to solve clinical problems. The last phase, integration or the transfer of knowledge, is used
in different ways.
Instructional design models.
Although there are many instructional design models, here only the analysis, design, development,
implementation, and evaluation (ADDIE) model (10), Dick and Carey model (5), and the 4CD/ID
model (45, 46) are discussed. Both the ADDIE and Dick and Carey models use a behavioral
approach in designing instruction. However, the ADDIE model is simpler and easier to use than
the Dick and Carey model, which elaborates on instructional design phases. The 4C/ID model is

aligned with cognitivists learning approaches and is informed by cognitive load theory in designing
instruction for learning complex tasks.
To produce effective instruction, all instructional design models require the following phases:
analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation. These instructional design phases
are summarized by the acronym ADDIE, and hence it is now considered a separate model. The
ADDIE model (Fig. 2) provides systematic approach for designing and developing a learning
experience. The outcome of each ADDIE phase informs the subsequent phase.
Fig. 2.Analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation (ADDIE) model phases and
the steps during each phase.
In the analysis phase, the learner, context, and instructional materials are analyzed to identify the
characteristics of the target learner (e.g., existing knowledge, previous experience, interests, and
attitudes) and determine instructional goals and the learning context/environment. In the design
phase, the learning objectives are identified to outline content and instructional strategies. The
latter consists of preinstructional activities, content presentation, and learner participation. During
the design phase, the delivery methods, types of learning activities, and different types of media
are selected. The development phase includes creating the instructional contents, a prototype, and
assessment instruments. The implementation phase is the actual delivery of instructional materials
to support students' mastery of the learning objectives. The evaluation phase includes formative
and summative evaluation. The formative evaluation occurs between the phases throughout the
entire instructional design process to continuously improve instruction before final
implementation. The summative evaluation occurs after the implementation of the final version to
assess the overall effectiveness of instruction.
Dick and Carey (5) outlined the importance of using a systematic approach in designing
instruction. The components of the system include the teacher, learner, instructional materials, and
learning environment. The effectiveness of the systematic approach in designing instruction is to

provide 1) focus when a clear goal or objectives are stated up front to guide the design of
instruction, 2) careful linkage between each component, and 3) an empirical and replicable
process. The Dick and Carey model includes the following steps:
 Identify instructional goals
 Conduct instructional analysis
 Identify entry behaviors and learner characteristics
 Write performance objectives
 Develop criterion-referenced test items
 Develop instructional strategy
 Develop and select instructional materials
 Develop and conduct formative evaluation
 Develop and conduct summative evaluation
The Dick and Carey model provides detailed step-by-step processes that could easily be followed.
It is very helpful for novice instructional designers to understand the details regarding the
principles of the systemic approach to instructional design. The main difference between the Dick
and Carey model and ADDIE model is that the former includes all the essential phases described
in the ADDIE model but with more elaboration. An example of this elaboration is what happens
in the analysis phase, which facilitates the writing of performance objectives or learning outcomes
(i.e., what a learner should be able to do; Fig. 3). The analysis is guided by assessing the needs to
identify the gap followed by writing the instructional goals and then the performance objectives.
Analyses of instruction, learners, and context are outlined as the necessary processes in identifying
the goals and writing performance objectives, and the focus of the analyses outcomes are also
defined.
Q. 3 Take a topic from Urdu text book of 7th grade and devise instructional objectives
Explain helping aids and strategies you will use to achieve those objectives in the classroom.
Goals are broad, generalized statements about what is to be learned. Think of them as a target to
be reached, or "hit." An instructional objective is a statement that will describe what the learner
will be able to do after completing the instruction. (Kibler, Kegla, Barker, Miles, 1974).
According to Dick and Carey (1990), a performance objective is a detailed description of what
students will be able to do when they complete a unit of instruction. It is also referred to as a
behavioral objective or an instructional objective.

Robert Mager (1984), in his book Preparing Instructional Objectives, describes an objective as "a
collection of words and/or pictures and diagrams intended to let others know what you intend for
your students to achieve" (pg. 3). An objective does not describe what the instructor will be doing,
but instead the skills, knowledge, and attitudes that the instructor will be attempting to produce in
learners.
 Instructional objectives are specific, measurable, short-term, observable student behaviors.
They indicate the desirable knowledge, skills, or attitudes to be gained.
 An instructional objective is the focal point of a lesson plan. Objectives are the foundation
upon which you can build lessons and assessments and instruction that you can prove meet
your overall course or lesson goals.
 Think of objectives as tools you use to make sure you reach your goals. They are the arrows
you shoot towards your target (goal).
 Begin with an understanding of the particular content to which the objectives will relate.
 The purpose of objectives is not to restrict spontaneity or constrain the vision of education
in the discipline; but to ensure that learning is focused clearly enough that both students
and teacher know what is going on, and so learning can be objectively measured. Different
archers have different styles, so do different teachers. Thus, you can shoot your arrows
(objectives) many ways. The important thing is that they reach your target (goals) and score
that bullseye!
The purpose of a behavioral objective is to communicate . Therefore, a well-constructed behavioral
objective should leave little room for doubt about what is intended.
 Objectives communicate and guide development of assessment, instructional methods, and
content materials.
 Objectives communicate the focus of learning that enables instructors and students to work
toward a common goal.
o The teacher can use objectives to make sure goals are reached.
o Students will understand expectations. Any skill is learned more effectively if the
learner understands the reason for learning and practicing it.

 Objectives communicate the a ssessment and grading. Objectives provide a means of
measuring whether the students have succeeded in acquiring skills and knowledge.
 Objectives communicate and allow students the opportunity for self-evaluation .
Instructional objectives must be written to communicate realistic, measurable, and learner
centered outcomes.
 Realistic objectives can be achieved by the learners within your time frame and in your
given environment.
 Measurable objectives enable you to observe and determine how well learners have
acquired skills and knowledge.
 Learner centered objectives state what the learner can do at the end of training. They always
start with action verbs.
 Specify intended results or outcomes, and not the process Teaching and lecturing is part of
the process of instruction, but it isn't the purpose of the instruction. The purpose is to
facilitate learning.
Instructional objectives contain four components: the Audience, the Behavior, the Condition, and
the Degree. (Section 4 of this tutorial fully describes these components.)
Q. 4 Define instructional strategies. Which strategy is most appropriate to teach the concept
of living organism in the subject of science and why?
Science teaching is a complex activity that lies at the heart of the vision of science education
presented in the Standards. The teaching standards provide criteria for making judgments about
progress toward the vision; they describe what teachers of science at all grade levels should
understand and be able to do.
To highlight the importance of teachers in science education, these standards are presented first.
However, to attain the vision of science education described in the Standards, change is needed in
the entire system. Teachers are central to education, but they must not be placed in the position of
being solely responsible for reform. Teachers will need to work within a collegial, organizational,
and policy context that is supportive of good science teaching. In addition, students must accept
and share responsibility for their own learning.
In the vision of science education portrayed by the Standards, effective teachers of science create
an environment in which they and students work together as active learners. While students are
engaged in learning about the natural world and the scientific principles needed to understand it,

teachers are working with their colleagues to expand their knowledge about science teaching. To
teach science as portrayed by the Standards, teachers must have theoretical and practical
knowledge and abilities about science, learning, and science teaching.
The standards for science teaching are grounded in five assumptions.
 The vision of science education described by the Standards requires changes throughout
the entire system.
 What students learn is greatly influenced by how they are taught.
 The actions of teachers are deeply influenced by their perceptions of science as an
enterprise and as a subject to be taught and learned.
 Student understanding is actively constructed through individual and social processes.
 Actions of teachers are deeply influenced by their understanding of and relationships with
students.
THE VISION OF SCIENCE EDUCATION DESCRIBED BY THE STANDARDS REQUIRES
CHANGES THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE SYSTEM. The educational system must act to
sustain effective teaching. The routines, rewards, structures, and expectations of the system must
endorse the vision of science teaching portrayed by the Standards. Teachers must be provided with
resources, time, and opportunities to make change as described in the program and system
standards. They must work within a framework that encourages their efforts.
The changes required in the educational system to support quality science teaching are major ones.
Each component of the system will change at a different pace, and most changes will be
incremental. Nonetheless, changes in teaching must begin before all of the systemic problems are
solved.
WHAT STUDENTS LEARN IS GREATLY INFLUENCED BY HOW THEY ARE
TAUGHT. The decisions about content and activities that teachers make, their interactions with
students, the selection of assessments, the habits of mind that teacher demonstrate and nurture
among their students, and the attitudes conveyed wittingly and unwittingly all affect the
knowledge, understanding, abilities, and attitudes that students develop.
THE ACTIONS OF TEACHERS ARE DEEPLY INFLUENCED BY THEIR PERCEPTIONS
OF SCIENCE AS AN ENTERPRISE AND AS A SUBJECT TO BE TAUGHT AND
LEARNED. All teachers of science have implicit and explicit beliefs about science, learning, and
teaching. Teachers can be effective guides for students learning science only if they have the

opportunity to examine their own beliefs, as well as to develop an understanding of the tenets on
which the Standards are based.
STUDENT UNDERSTANDING IS ACTIVELY CONSTRUCTED THROUGH INDIVIDUAL
AND SOCIAL PROCESSES. In the same way that scientists develop their knowledge and
understanding as they seek answers to questions about the natural world, students develop an
understanding of the natural world when they are actively engaged in scientific inquiry—alone
and with others.
ACTIONS OF TEACHERS ARE DEEPLY INFLUENCED BY THEIR UNDERSTANDING OF
AND RELATIONSHIPS WITH STUDENTS. The standards for science teaching require building
strong, sustained relationships with students. These relationships are grounded in knowledge and
awareness of the similarities and differences in students' backgrounds, experiences, and current
views of science. The diversity of today's student population and the commitment to science
education for all requires a firm belief that all students can learn science.
Q. 5 Prepare a list of non-projected aids which can be used in the classroom. Among them
which is most suitable? Justify your answer with the help of examples.
Teaching learning materials (TLMs) are the tools, which are used by teachers to help learners to
learn concept with ease and efficiency. Below are the types of teaching materials used:
1. Audio Aids: It includes human voice, telephonic conversation, audio discs/tapes,
gramophone records, Radio broadcast.
2. Visual Aids: It includes Visual (Verbal) Print e.g. Textbook, Supplementary book.
Reference books, encyclopedia, Magazine, Newspaper, Documents and Clippings,
Duplicated written material, Programmed material , Case Studies/Reports,
3. Visual (Pictorial- Non Projected )–
a) Non-projected two dimensional – Here the TLM is in form of an image or picture e.g.
blackboard writing and drawing Charts, Posters, Maps,Diagrams, Graphs, Photographs, Cartoons,
Comic strips.
b) Non-Projected three-dimensional – This category includes three dimensional representation of
the real object or phenomenon e.g. Models, Mock-up,Diorama, Globe, Relief Map, Specimen,
Puppet, and Hologram.
4. Visual (Projected but still) – Here the images are projected or displayed on a screen and thus
are nearer reality than visual non-projected ones e.g. Slide, Filmstrips, Over Head Projector (OHP),
Microfilm,Micro card, etc.

5. Audio Visual TLMs are the projected aids, which use both auditory and visual senses to enhance
learning e.g. Motion Picture Film, Television, Video discs/cassettes, slide – tape presentations,
Multimedia, Computer.
The OECD Education Policy Committee and Group of National Experts (GNE) on School
Resources, as well as the individual delegates to these bodies, provided essential support and
analytical guidance since the inception of the project, and offered useful feedback on drafts of this
report. At the time of publication of this report, the Group of National Experts was chaired by Mr
Jørn Skovsgaard, Senior Advisor of the Danish Ministry of Education; and had as vice-chairs Ms
Marie-Anne Persoons, Advisor International Policy in the Strategic Policy Support Division of the
Flemish Ministry of Education and Training and Mr Matej Šiškovi , Director of the Educational
Policy Institute at the Slovak Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sports. Ms Shelley
Robertson, Chief Advisor International Education, New Zealand Ministry of Education, served as
vice-chair for the GNE from May 2014 to May 2015 and chaired its 1st meeting. The dedication
and leadership of the chair and vice-chairs is gratefully acknowledged. The School Resources
Review and this report also benefited substantially from the active involvement of different
stakeholders with an interest in education. The Business and Industry Advisory Committee to the
OECD (BIAC) and the Trade Union Advisory Committee to the OECD (TUAC) participated in
meetings of the Group of National Experts on School Resources as permanent observers and
commented on drafts of this report. During individual country reviews, students, parents, teachers,
school leaders, researchers and employers made their time available to meet with review teams
and to provide their perspective of school resource policy issues. Within a broader framework of
collaboration, a partnership with the European Commission (EC) was established for the OECD
School Resources Review, as part of which this report was prepared. The support of the EC covers
part of the participation costs of countries which are part of the European Union Erasmus+
programme and contributes significantly to the preparation of the series of thematic comparative
reports, including this report on school funding. The support of the European Commission for the
School Resources Review is gratefully acknowledged. The review team would like to thank in
particular current and former colleagues at the EC Directorate-General for Education and Culture,
Unit A.2: Education and Training in Europe 2020 under the leadership of Michael Teutsch (until
December 2016) and Denis Crowley (since January 2017) and deputy leadership of Mónika Képe-
Holmberg, and Unit B.2: Schools and Multilingualism under the leadership of Sophie Beernaerts

(until December 2016) and Michael Teutsch (since January 2017) and deputy leadership of Diana
Jablonska. Unit A.2 co-ordinated the collaboration at the EC and contributed to the individual
country reviews (see Annex D). In addition, collaboration with Eurydice, the Inter-American
Development Bank (IDB), the Organising Bureau of European School Student Unions (OBESSU),
the Standing International Conference of Inspectorates (SICI), the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the UNESCO International Institute for
Educational Planning (IIEP-UNESCO) and the World Bank, ensured synergies between the work
undertaken by different organisations and provided valuable input into the project and this report.
The review is indebted to the many individual experts who contributed to the country review visits
and the resulting country review reports that are part of the publication series OECD Reviews of
School Resources (for the composition of the country review teams, see Annex D). Their expertise,
analytical contributions to the country-specific reports and professional exchanges with OECD
Secretariat members provided the foundation for analysing school funding from a comparative
perspective in this report. The country background reports prepared by participating countries
provided a further important source of information and thanks are due to all those who contributed
to these reports. In addition to this publication, by June 2017, the review had generated 16 reports
by participating countries, 10 reports by external review teams and several research papers (all
available on the OECD website at www.oecd.org/education/schoolresourcesreview.htm). Within
the OECD Directorate for Education and Skills, from its inception until the publication of this
report, the review was carried out by the Early Childhood and Schools Division under the
leadership of Michael Davidson (from January 2013 to September 2014) and Yuri Belfali (from
October 2014 to July 2016) and by the Policy Advice and Implementation Division under the
leadership of Paulo Santiago (since August 2016). Deborah Nusche (co-ordinator since December
2016), Thomas Radinger, Paulo Santiago (co-ordinator between January 2013 and July 2016) and
Claire Shewbridge were responsible for the review, assuming leadership for the analytical work
and individual country reviews. Important analytical contributions to the project were made by
Anna Pons (who led the review of Kazakhstan) and Tracey Burns (who participated in the review
of Uruguay). Eleonore Morena (since November 2014), Elizabeth Zachary (from October 2013 to
December 2014) and Heike-Daniela Herzog (from January 2013 to September 2013) took
responsibility for the administrative work within the review, the organisation of meetings and
communication with the countries.

Assignment No. 2
Q. 1 Explain the role of educational broadcasting in teaching process. How Radio can be
helpful to distance learners living in rural areas?
At the dawn of the twentieth century, the development of what we now know as “radio”
began. The work of scientists and inventors such as Nikola Tesla, Guglielmo Marconi, Lee De
Forest, and many others laid the foundations for all forms of radio broadcasting (“History of
Radio”, 2009). Starting in the early 1920’s, radio stations began transmitting to a relatively small,
but growing number of listeners. Concomitant with the growing popularity of radio broadcasting
was an increasing interest in its use in education. The reach and immediacy of radio provided
educators with a new and potentially powerful medium through which to support and modify
education. While firmly affixed in an oral and aural realm, from the outset, the purpose of
educational radio has been to complement the existing curricula and strong reliance on written text
within Western education systems of the twentieth century. Furthermore, educational radio set the
stage for later educational technologies, providing a framework for the adoption and
implementation of these technologies that has continued to date. In this introduction to and
analysis of the history of educational radio, our purpose is three-fold: we hope to demonstrate how
educational radio supported text-based education; describe how the inclusion of radio supported
student literacy; and propose that the foundation of educational radio provided a framework for
future efforts in the implementations of educational technology.
Prior to the development and wide-spread deployment of television, radio was the first electronic
mass medium (Lewis, 1992, p. 26). Starting in 1920 in the United States, locations such as Detroit
and Pittsburgh were initial launch points for radio broadcasting (Ackerman, 1945, p. 2). By 1922
there were thirty radio station transmitters and 60,000 receivers in use (Ackerman, 1945, p. 2). The
number of radio transmitters and receivers in the United States continues to increase such that in
1942, Seerley Reid stated that “radio is an indispensable and indisputable part of American life”
(p. 115). With its advent, the radio allowed anyone who had one to listen to news or other
informational broadcasts without having to wait for the newspaper, or even listen to live
entertainment without having to physically be there. Lewis (1992) described this profound change
in dissemination of information by stating that, “the new medium of radio was to the printing press
what the telephone had been to the letter: it allowed immediacy” (p. 26). From the time that the
first sounds were broadcast over the U.S. airwaves in 1920, the two main functions of radio have

been to entertain and to inform. As Ackerman (1945) noted, “no entertainment medium [had] ever
before faced the insatiable demands which [were] laid upon radio”.
The use of radio as an educational tool further augmented its informational function. Programmes
designed specifically for K-12 and post-secondary education were developed, both by private
broadcasters and by radio stations set up exclusively for the use of education. Students, in
traditional classroom settings (or individually via distance education) could listen to programs, or
with the use of transceivers, could interact with radio programs. In this manner, students would
receive educational programming that expanded on their classroom learning. Alternatively, not
all educational efforts in radio were praised. According to Saettler (1990), “the first years of
[American] university broadcasting were generally ineffective because many a professor repeated
his classroom lecture before the microphone without realizing that a good lecturer was not
necessarily an effective broadcaster” (as cited in Hokanson & Hooper, 2000, p. 542). The varying
degrees to which the effectiveness of educational radio was perceived set the stage for discussion
of future educational technologies and their effect on education.
In addition to targeting students, progressive educational radio could also focus on teachers,
assisting them in “learn[ing] progressive Deweyan methods of teaching” (Cavanaugh, et al., 2004,
p. 3). A good example of the imposition of education philosophy is in the distribution of radio
teaching manuals at the Wisconsin School of the Air (Bianchi, 2002, p. 142). In these teaching
manuals, ideas for strengthening and contextualizing radio programming in the classroom were
suggested; such ideas were largely based on Dewey’s philosophy of experiential or activity-based
learning (see Dewey, 1938). Teachers who created programs at the school agreed with the
Deweyan philosophy and through programming, tried to demonstrate that when the classroom
teacher actively facilitated learning, students were more attentive and involved (Bianchi, 2002,
p.144). Thus, the new medium of radio was seen as aiding in the promotion and implementations
of new, promising educational theories for teachers and students alike.
Three locations in the world have had a strong background in implementing radio in education:
the United States, Canada, and Australia. While other nations also developed educational radio
programs, a brief examination of the implementation of and distinctions between radio
implementation in these three countries highlights some of the major developments in the field, as
development was not evenly distributed in the world or even within a country (Reid, 1942, p. 188).

Educational radio in the United States was provided both by educational institutions and
by private, for-profit broadcasters. Starting in 1921, broadcasting licences were held by
universities in Utah, Wisconsin, and Minnesota (Casey, 2008, p. 46). By 1925, 171 licences had
been granted (Farley, 1952, p. 18). In addition, K-12 education systems in Ohio and Wisconsin
were developing “schools of the air”, that would provide curriculum for use within traditional
schools and distance education programs (Reid, 1942, p. 118; Williams & Nicholas, 2004, p.
111). In the case of the Wisconsin School of the Air, founders chose to offer programming that
would complement the elementary curriculum, especially in rural areas where teachers were
expected to teach many subjects in multi-grade classrooms (Bianchi, 2002). In this case, students
were able to experience programming such as in music or other specialized field where the teacher
may have little or no knowledge in that area.
In 1930, private broadcasters such as Columbia Broadcasting Systems (CBS) (“American School
of the Air”), and the National Broadcasting Corporation (NBC) began developing educational
radio programmes on a variety of music, science and social studies topics for use by students
(Bagley, 1930, p. 256; Reid, 1942, p. 132-133). Again, these programmes met with a variety of
success from being described as meeting, “in a fairly meritorious way the conditions that education
broadcasting must meet if it is to be a useful adjunct to school instruction,” (Nasseh, 1997, para.
7) to a 1940 college-level course offered by radio that “failed to attract any enrollments” (Bagley,
1930, p. 257). Lewis (1992) suggests that private broadcasters may also have been encouraged to
develop such programmes by lobby groups such as the “National Committee on Education by
Radio” and “the threat of legislation,” by the United States Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) (p. 31). As is the case with any major technological advancement, particularly in education,
educational radio in the United States met with a collision between adversity and bewilderment;
by so-called “technophobes” and “technophiles” (Postman, 1993).
Canada developed educational radio in a somewhat similar fashion to the United States, albeit on
a smaller scale. Radio programmes were developed both for traditional classrooms and distance
education. Starting in 1925, the Canadian National Railways (CNR) radio network broadcasted
musical appreciation programmes (Buck, 2008, p. 80). The following year in 1926, CNRV, the
CNR radio station in Vancouver broadcasted directly to Point Grey School for the Deaf and Blind
(Buck, 2008, p. 80). The CNR radio network later was transformed into the Canadian Radio
Broadcasting Commission, which ultimately became the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

(CBC). The CBC continued to provide educational radio programmes for provinces such as British
Columbia (Buck, 2008, p. 8586), where other educational radio broadcasts took place through
various provincial ministries of education via local radio stations. For example, CMHS in Nova
Scotia provided government endorsed educational programming, while in Edmonton, Alberta,
local station CKUA was the vehicle for educational radio (Buck, 2008, 86). Similarities and
differences existed between the Canadian and American systems: in the United States, nation-wide
broadcasting was lobbied for while in Canada, despite the similarity in the methodology of
educational radio programme delivery, regional variances in educational radio demonstrate the
diversity and locality of the Canadian education system.
Q. 2 Explain the models of communication. Highlight problems involved in the way of
communication and devise strategies to resolve them
Communication is a complex process, and it is difficult to determine where or with whom a
communication encounter starts and ends. It can sometimes be helpful to consider different
communication models. Below are some questions to help guide you through this chapter.
Models of communication simplify the process by providing a visual representation of the various
aspects of a communication encounter. Some models explain communication in more detail than
others, but even the most complex model still doesn’t recreate what we experience in even a
moment of a communication encounter. Models still serve a valuable purpose for students of
communication because they allow us to see specific concepts and steps within the process of
communication, define communication, and apply communication concepts. When you become
aware of how communication functions, you can think more deliberately through your
communication encounters, which can help you better prepare for future communication and learn
from your previous communication. The three models of communication we will discuss are the
transmission, interaction, and transaction models.
Although these models of communication differ, they contain some common elements. The first
two models we will discuss, the transmission model and the interaction model, include the
following parts: participants, messages, encoding, decoding, and channels. In communication
models, the participants are the senders and/or receivers of messages in a communication
encounter. The message is the verbal or nonverbal content being conveyed from sender to receiver.
For example, when you say “Hello!” to your friend, you are sending a message of greeting that
will be received by your friend.

The internal cognitive process that allows participants to send, receive, and understand messages
is the encoding and decoding process. Encoding is the process of turning thoughts into
communication. As we will learn later, the level of conscious thought that goes into encoding
messages varies. Decoding is the process of turning communication into thoughts. For example,
you may realize you’re hungry and encode the following message to send to your roommate: “I’m
hungry. Do you want to get pizza tonight?” As your roommate receives the message, they decode
your communication and turn it back into thoughts in order to make meaning out of it. Of course,
we don’t just communicate verbally—we have various options, or channels for communication.
Encoded messages are sent through a channel, or a sensory route on which a message travels, to
the receiver for decoding. While communication can be sent and received using any sensory route
(sight, smell, touch, taste, or sound), most communication occurs through visual (sight) and/or
auditory (sound) channels. If your roommate has headphones on and is engrossed in a video game,
you may need to get their attention by waving your hands before you can ask them about dinner.
The linear or transmission model of communication, as shown in Figure 2.2.1, describes
communication as a linear, one-way process in which a sender intentionally transmits a message
to a receiver (Ellis & McClintock, 1990). This model focuses on the sender and message within a
communication encounter. Although the receiver is included in the model, this role is viewed as
more of a target or end point rather than part of an ongoing process. We are left to presume that
the receiver either successfully receives and understands the message or does not. The scholars
who designed this model extended on a linear model proposed by Aristotle centuries before that
included a speaker, message, and hearer. They were also influenced by the advent and spread of
new communication technologies of the time such as telegraphy and radio, and you can probably
see these technical influences within the model (Shannon & Weaver, 1949). Think of how a radio
message is sent from a person in the radio studio to you listening in your car. The sender is the
radio announcer who encodes a verbal message that is transmitted by a radio tower through
electromagnetic waves (the channel) and eventually reaches your (the receiver’s) ears via an
antenna and speakers in order to be decoded. The radio announcer doesn’t really know if you
receive their message or not, but if the equipment is working and the channel is free of static, then
there is a good chance that the message was successfully received.

The interactive or interaction model of communication, as shown in Figure 2.2.2, describes
communication as a process in which participants alternate positions as sender and receiver and
generate meaning by sending messages and receiving feedback within physical and psychological
contexts (Schramm, 1997). Rather than illustrating communication as a linear, one-way process,
the interactive model incorporates feedback, which makes communication a more interactive, two-
way process. Feedback includes messages sent in response to other messages. For example, your
instructor may respond to a point you raise during class discussion or you may point to the sofa
when your roommate asks you where the remote control is. The inclusion of a feedback loop also
leads to a more complex understanding of the roles of participants in a communication encounter.
Rather than having one sender, one message, and one receiver, this model has two sender-receivers
who exchange messages. Each participant alternates roles as sender and receiver in order to keep
a communication encounter going. Although this seems like a perceptible and deliberate process,
we alternate between the roles of sender and receiver very quickly and often without conscious
thought.
The interactive model is also less message focused and more interaction focused. While the linear
model focused on how a message was transmitted and whether or not it was received, the
interactive model is more concerned with the communication process itself. In fact, this model
acknowledges that there are so many messages being sent at one time that many of them may not
even be received. Some messages are also unintentionally sent. Therefore, communication isn’t
judged effective or ineffective in this model based on whether or not a single message was
successfully transmitted and received.
Q. 3 Select a topic of your interest from English text book of 8th grade. Explain suitable
media to teach that topic to the students with the help of examples.
Pedagogical content knowledge is different from knowledge of general teaching methods. Expert
teachers know the structure of their disciplines, and this knowledge provides them with cognitive
roadmaps that guide the assignments they give students, the assessments they use to gauge
students’ progress, and the questions they ask in the give and take of classroom life. In short, their
knowledge of the discipline and their knowledge of pedagogy interact. But knowledge of the
discipline structure does not in itself guide the teacher. For example, expert teachers are sensitive
to those aspects of the discipline that are especially hard or easy for new students to master.

This means that new teachers must develop the ability to “understand in a pedagogically reflective
way; they must not only know their own way around a discipline, but must know the ‘conceptual
barriers’ likely to hinder others” (McDonald and Naso, 1986:8). These conceptual barriers differ
from discipline to discipline.
An emphasis on interactions between disciplinary knowledge and pedagogical knowledge directly
contradicts common misconceptions about what teachers need to know in order to design effective
learning environments for their students. The misconceptions are that teaching consists only of a
set of general methods, that a good teacher can teach any subject, or that content knowledge alone
is sufficient.
Some teachers are able to teach in ways that involve a variety of disciplines. However, their ability
to do so requires more than a set of general teaching skills. Consider the case of Barb Johnson,
who has been a sixth-grade teacher for 12 years at Monroe Middle School. By conventional
standards Monroe is a good school. Standardized test scores are about average, class size is small,
the building facilities are well maintained, the administrator is a strong instructional leader, and
there is little faculty and staff turnover. However, every year parents sending their fifth-grade
students from the local elementary schools to Monroe jockey to get their children assigned to Barb
Johnson’s classes. What happens in her classroom that gives it the reputation of being the best of
the best?
During the first week of school Barb Johnson asks her sixth graders two questions: “What
questions do you have about yourself?” and “What questions do you have about the world?” The
students begin enumerating their questions, “Can they be about silly, little things?” asks one
student. “If they’re your questions that you really want answered, they’re neither silly nor little,”
replies the teacher. After the students list their individual questions, Barb organizes the students
into small groups where they share lists and search for questions they have in common. After much
discussion each group comes up with a priority list of questions, rank-ordering the questions about
themselves and those about the world.
Back together in a whole group session, Barb Johnson solicits the groups’ priorities and works
toward consensus for the class’s combined lists of questions. These questions become the basis for
guiding the curriculum in Barb’s class. One question, “Will I live to be 100 years old?” spawned
educational investigations into genetics, family and oral history, actuarial science, statistics and
probability, heart disease, cancer, and hypertension. The students had the opportunity to seek out

information from family members, friends, experts in various fields, on-line computer services,
and books, as well as from the teacher. She describes what they had to do as becoming part of a
“learning community.” According to Barb Johnson, “We decide what are the most compelling
intellectual issues, devise ways to investigate those issues
and start off on a learning journey. Sometimes we fall short of our goal. Sometimes we reach our
goal, but most times we exceed these goals—we learn more than we initially expected” (personal
communication).
At the end of an investigation, Barb Johnson works with the students to help them see how their
investigations relate to conventional subject-matter areas. They create a chart on which they tally
experiences in language and literacy, mathematics, science, social studies and history, music, and
art. Students often are surprised at how much and how varied their learning is. Says one student,
“I just thought we were having fun. I didn’t realize we were learning, too!”
Barb Johnson’s teaching is extraordinary. It requires a wide range of disciplinary knowledge
because she begins with students’ questions rather than with a fixed curriculum. Because of her
extensive knowledge, she can map students’ questions onto important principles of relevant
disciplines. It would not work to simply arm new teachers with general strategies that mirror how
she teaches and encourage them to use this approach in their classrooms. Unless they have the
relevant disciplinary knowledge, the teachers and the classes would quickly become lost. At the
same time, disciplinary knowledge without knowledge about how students learn (i.e., principles
consistent with developmental and learning psychology) and how to lead the processes of learning
(i.e., pedagogical knowledge) would not yield the kind of learning seen in Barb Johnson’s classes
(Anderson and Smith, 1987).
In the remainder of this chapter, we present illustrations and discussions of exemplary teaching in
history, mathematics, and science. The three examples of history, mathematics, and science are
designed to convey a sense of the pedagogical knowledge and content knowledge (Shulman, 1987)
that underlie expert teaching. They should help to clarify why effective teaching requires much
more than a set of “general teaching skills.”
Q. 4 Imagine that you are a head teacher of an elementary school. How do you plan a
resource center which can fulfill the needs of teaching and learning process?
This classroom management plan is a step-by-step guide and includes proven strategies, tips
and printables for elementary school teachers, and it covers four key components for
establishing a successful, well-managed classroom:

1. Classroom Set-Up and Organization
2. Classroom Rules and Procedures
3. Classroom Rewards and Consequences
4. Effective Classroom Management Throughout the Year
If you’re a new teacher, switching grade levels, or realizing that your current classroom
management plan isn’t cutting it, you may feel overwhelmed. Sure, it’s fun to browse
Pinterest, teacher blogs, and educational websites to get ideas, but filtering and assembling
those ideas into a classroom management plan is a lot of work.
So instead of starting from scratch, why not use our plan as a framework and tailor it to your
needs? Simply pick and choose what you believe will work best for you, and as you find
other ideas you like, just mix them in.
In this plan, we make a lot of references to the first few weeks of school, but if you’re reading
this after the start of the school year, or even in the second semester, it’s not too late.
“My feeling about things not going well in a classroom is that you don’t have to wait for a
new school year to turn things around and make things start to go better,” says former
teacher Jennifer Gonzalez.
And if you try something for a while, and it just doesn’t work for your students, that’s okay,
too. Consistency is good, so don’t change your entire management system once a month;
however, it’s better to introduce something new than to spend the rest of the year with a
chaotic classroom.
Part One: Classroom Set-Up and Organization
Read this before you hit the Target dollar bins or spend hours laminating everything in sight.
In this section, we discuss the layout and organizational systems of your classroom. This
will lay the foundation of your management plan, so take the time to think about how these
ideas could fit in your four walls.
Part Two: Establishing Classroom Rules and Procedures
Classroom rules and procedures may seem interchangeable, but they are actually two
different components of your management plan. You’ll want as few rules as possible, and
procedures in place that leave your students no room to fail your expectations. We give you
tips on both in this section.

Part Three: Creating Classroom Rewards and Consequences
There are several different reward and consequence systems out there, and multiple
arguments for which is best. No system is right or wrong – the best system motivates your
particular students. We focus on positive behavior reinforcement, and you can use any of
these suggestions in conjunction with school-wide frameworks such as Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports (PBIS).
Part Four: Effective Classroom Management throughout the Year
When your students are at home, in another part of the school, or moving to the next grade
level, they won’t have your rules and procedures to tell them how to act. We’ll provide you
with lessons and activities to strengthen your students’ ability to think critically about their
behavior.
Q. 5 How combination of computer and communication technologies can be helpful to
distance learners?
E-learning has become the main stream among higher education institutions. Courses in various
fields are offered online, students can enroll for a course through internet, lecturers and students
are able to share online course materials which include notes, assignments and other multimedia
contents. In universities, higher learning institutes as well, large or small, online teaching/learning
systems are a key component of their education systems. For a number of the higher education
institutions, a well-established online teaching/learning system is their lifeline for keeping their
classes running. This paper intended to analyze the role of ICT integration into teaching and
learning method through e-learning. The results showed that all 4 studied higher learning institutes
did not establish an e-learning system. The proposed solution is to implement a blending teaching
method while besides the existing face-to-face method an e-learning system is also deemed useful.
The efficient implementation is the open source development software like moodle which is a free,
secure and customizable platform and suitable to significantly reduce the cost of developing and
supporting online classes while improving reliability and performance of the institution. Open and
distance learning is getting more dependent on information and communication technology (ICT)
and has been playing an important role in the delivery strategies of distance learning. With the
advancement in technology in the field education has introduces variety of new techniques for
educators and learners to enhance knowledge. Educational technologies (information and
communication technology) are replacing direct teacher-student interaction. Anything that helps

distance learners to communicate: learner with instructor, learner with learner and learner with the
learning materials may be term as information technology. Technological advancements especially
in the area of ICT allow teachers to employ various strategies that could actively engage student's
interest. This paper focuses the role of information and communication technologies (ICT) in open
and distance education. This study also explores technology-based media which is very important
for distance learners.
Speaking from the perspective of someone who is both an entrepreneur and investor in ICT-
enabled businesses, I will first point out some personal encounters with Open and Distance
Learning; and then we shall focus on some key learnings; and then we shall further explore some
next steps we might take as a country to strengthen higher education through ODL- making it
attractive to the students, investors and all other stakeholders.
Years ago, I was fortunate to start a company called Emerging Platforms that later went on to build
Nigeria’s largest educational learning platform — supporting over 150,000 students within a really
short time. While we were still engaged, we made the required capital investment and then our
fantastic team (of mostly young Nigerians) went on to train and on-board 100’s of tutors. We
supported lecturers to produce and publish thousands of hours of rich audio visual materials; then
set up a user support centre with round the clock access. Very quietly, we rolled out a truly
interactive virtual learning environment called NOUN iLearn!
This, by far, has been one of the most rewarding career highlights for me, and we remain grateful
to the National Open University of Nigeria and the National University Commission for the
opportunity to serve at that time. There are media reports that last year the 1.8 million candidates
who registered for the Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME) jostled for about
850,000 admission spaces (this number was far worse six years ago). And so it is quite clear that
Open and Distance Learning must play a very important role in Nigeria’s education mix.
Leveraging ICT presents an opportunity to expand borders, improve quality and maintain
standards.
Today, across the length and breadth of Nigeria, universities like, Ahmadu Bello University Zaria,
University of Nigeria, Nsukka and University of Ibadan to name a few are leveraging ODL to
expand and enrich conventional higher education in classrooms. With the robust support of the
regulator — the National University Commission, this very positive trend is catching on and in no

little way is changing the face of education in Nigeria. This is remarkable, and we are all grateful
to the National University Commission for its leadership in this regard.
Permit me to share a few principles that we have found to be critical to making ODL fit for
purpose — through the deployment of qualitative and fool-proof ICT components. First is to
Design with the local environment in mind. When designing our ICT systems we must take a
radically user-centred design approach. We must of necessity consider the peculiarities of the local
environment where these users exist. In our work, there are few questions we constantly ponder
upon. How do our intended users currently access content? What technology interface do they
utilise? What is the impact of power outages on how they interact with ICT? What is their income
level and what impact does this have on how they use ICT? One of the biggest insights that will
immediately jump at you from this exercise for instance is the need to compress content to the
barest minimum size without losing quality or perhaps chunk the size of video lectures.
Provide multi-channel learner support. It is essential to provide a duplicity of easy to use and easy
to reach support channels. Your users are going to need it. From experience, these channels should
include; social media support, email, toll free lines and on platform chat. It is also usually best that
access to these support channels are themselves embedded within the learning environment.
Don’t ignore the lecturers. While an increasing number of the learners are digital natives, the
facilitators or teachers are mostly digital migrants. Do not ignore them! To ensure adoption,
provide maximum support and create a user-friendly interface that is easy for them to comprehend.
It is also critical to ensure incentives and rewards are properly aligned and this most times will
require deep institutional changes.
Incorporate Quality Assurance Process in design. One of the paradoxes of ODL is that the goal
remains to provide learning online or remotely without compromising on quality. It is therefore
essential that the systems we build and implement have non-burdensome mechanisms for
monitoring, assessing and evaluating quality on an ongoing basis.

834-12.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 834-12.docx

Similar to 834-12.docx (20)

More from Noaman Akbar

More from Noaman Akbar (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

834-12.docx