TTPlus is an European funded research project which looks at the actual practice of trainers in companies.
Have a look at the website
http://ttplus.bazaar.org
TTPlus is an European funded research project which looks at the actual practice of trainers in companies.
Have a look at the website
http://ttplus.bazaar.org
Inside in-service teacher training (RISE)David Evans
In this study, we examine in-service teacher training to improve the quality of education in low and middle income countries. We propose an instrument to more consistently capture elements of the program.
This work is joint with Anna Popova and Violeta Arancibia.
What are Learning Outcomes? Types, Benefits, and Examples of Learning OutcomesAnirudhRoy11
Learning outcomes are measurable educational aspects that include students’ knowledge, skills, and abilities to face real-life problems and not just the course outcomes & program outcomes.
An overview of the tool developed by the Consortium for Chicago School Research that we will be using to help provide Detroit school leaders with the tools and information they need to improve education for our kids, and to give a voice to our great and hardworking teachers and students.
How much does it cost to get that impact? Measuring cost effectivenessDavid Evans
This presentation, on cost effectiveness and cost benefit analysis for impact evaluations, was delivered at the World Bank DIME Field Coordinator workshop on June 8, 2016.
A range of resources for carrying out cost analysis are included in the final slides.
Supporting High Impact Practices with portfolio-based learning Alison PootePortfolios Australia
"Born out of a recognition that today’s graduates need to be responsible global citizens, aware of and respectful of other cultures, and equipped to respond to the challenges the future holds, High-Impact Practices (HIPs) offer a structure to help educators create learning cultures designed to develop the whole person and nurture graduates who are genuinely future-ready. HIPs were first proposed by George Kuh (2008) and his research suggests that when done well, they can enhance student success, retention and engagement. This presentation will introduce the eleven HIPs, the elements essential to making practice meaningful and high-impact, and the central role that portfolios can play in supporting these practices. A number of international examples of portfolio practice will be showcased to demonstrate this theory in action.
Kuh, G. D. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities.
"
Building Capacity in Your 21st Century Teacherscatapultlearn
We will examine what is needed from building a multi-tiered, differentiated professional development plan to identifying the six performance traits necessary to provide challenge and support to our students.
• Identify the critical attributes of building capacity in a 21st century teacher
• Examine the multi-tiered approach to differentiated professional development
• Identify the six performance traits and what it takes to develop expertise in our students and ourselves.
Summary of key messages from the HMIE Aspect Report on Computing provision in Scotland's Colleges 2009
Presented to Heads of Computing Conference, Glasgow 4th Dec 2009
Inside in-service teacher training (RISE)David Evans
In this study, we examine in-service teacher training to improve the quality of education in low and middle income countries. We propose an instrument to more consistently capture elements of the program.
This work is joint with Anna Popova and Violeta Arancibia.
What are Learning Outcomes? Types, Benefits, and Examples of Learning OutcomesAnirudhRoy11
Learning outcomes are measurable educational aspects that include students’ knowledge, skills, and abilities to face real-life problems and not just the course outcomes & program outcomes.
An overview of the tool developed by the Consortium for Chicago School Research that we will be using to help provide Detroit school leaders with the tools and information they need to improve education for our kids, and to give a voice to our great and hardworking teachers and students.
How much does it cost to get that impact? Measuring cost effectivenessDavid Evans
This presentation, on cost effectiveness and cost benefit analysis for impact evaluations, was delivered at the World Bank DIME Field Coordinator workshop on June 8, 2016.
A range of resources for carrying out cost analysis are included in the final slides.
Supporting High Impact Practices with portfolio-based learning Alison PootePortfolios Australia
"Born out of a recognition that today’s graduates need to be responsible global citizens, aware of and respectful of other cultures, and equipped to respond to the challenges the future holds, High-Impact Practices (HIPs) offer a structure to help educators create learning cultures designed to develop the whole person and nurture graduates who are genuinely future-ready. HIPs were first proposed by George Kuh (2008) and his research suggests that when done well, they can enhance student success, retention and engagement. This presentation will introduce the eleven HIPs, the elements essential to making practice meaningful and high-impact, and the central role that portfolios can play in supporting these practices. A number of international examples of portfolio practice will be showcased to demonstrate this theory in action.
Kuh, G. D. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities.
"
Building Capacity in Your 21st Century Teacherscatapultlearn
We will examine what is needed from building a multi-tiered, differentiated professional development plan to identifying the six performance traits necessary to provide challenge and support to our students.
• Identify the critical attributes of building capacity in a 21st century teacher
• Examine the multi-tiered approach to differentiated professional development
• Identify the six performance traits and what it takes to develop expertise in our students and ourselves.
Summary of key messages from the HMIE Aspect Report on Computing provision in Scotland's Colleges 2009
Presented to Heads of Computing Conference, Glasgow 4th Dec 2009
5 principles to assess blended learning environments through a 'blended surveying' approach. Some examples from my own practice as well. This is linked to my "When Student Confidence Clicks" project.
by Dr. Karen Swan
Dr. Swan will discuss tools and techniques of assessing the impact of technology on learning, beginning with asking the right questions. Good questions, she argues, specify not just outcomes, but also inputs and, most importantly, learning processes. Each of these will be discussed in terms of categories and measures for guiding assessment.
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...Sandy Millin
http://sandymillin.wordpress.com/iateflwebinar2024
Published classroom materials form the basis of syllabuses, drive teacher professional development, and have a potentially huge influence on learners, teachers and education systems. All teachers also create their own materials, whether a few sentences on a blackboard, a highly-structured fully-realised online course, or anything in between. Despite this, the knowledge and skills needed to create effective language learning materials are rarely part of teacher training, and are mostly learnt by trial and error.
Knowledge and skills frameworks, generally called competency frameworks, for ELT teachers, trainers and managers have existed for a few years now. However, until I created one for my MA dissertation, there wasn’t one drawing together what we need to know and do to be able to effectively produce language learning materials.
This webinar will introduce you to my framework, highlighting the key competencies I identified from my research. It will also show how anybody involved in language teaching (any language, not just English!), teacher training, managing schools or developing language learning materials can benefit from using the framework.
Embracing GenAI - A Strategic ImperativePeter Windle
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
Macroeconomics- Movie Location
This will be used as part of your Personal Professional Portfolio once graded.
Objective:
Prepare a presentation or a paper using research, basic comparative analysis, data organization and application of economic information. You will make an informed assessment of an economic climate outside of the United States to accomplish an entertainment industry objective.
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...Levi Shapiro
Letter from the Congress of the United States regarding Anti-Semitism sent June 3rd to MIT President Sally Kornbluth, MIT Corp Chair, Mark Gorenberg
Dear Dr. Kornbluth and Mr. Gorenberg,
The US House of Representatives is deeply concerned by ongoing and pervasive acts of antisemitic
harassment and intimidation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Failing to act decisively to ensure a safe learning environment for all students would be a grave dereliction of your responsibilities as President of MIT and Chair of the MIT Corporation.
This Congress will not stand idly by and allow an environment hostile to Jewish students to persist. The House believes that your institution is in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and the inability or
unwillingness to rectify this violation through action requires accountability.
Postsecondary education is a unique opportunity for students to learn and have their ideas and beliefs challenged. However, universities receiving hundreds of millions of federal funds annually have denied
students that opportunity and have been hijacked to become venues for the promotion of terrorism, antisemitic harassment and intimidation, unlawful encampments, and in some cases, assaults and riots.
The House of Representatives will not countenance the use of federal funds to indoctrinate students into hateful, antisemitic, anti-American supporters of terrorism. Investigations into campus antisemitism by the Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Committee on Ways and Means have been expanded into a Congress-wide probe across all relevant jurisdictions to address this national crisis. The undersigned Committees will conduct oversight into the use of federal funds at MIT and its learning environment under authorities granted to each Committee.
• The Committee on Education and the Workforce has been investigating your institution since December 7, 2023. The Committee has broad jurisdiction over postsecondary education, including its compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, campus safety concerns over disruptions to the learning environment, and the awarding of federal student aid under the Higher Education Act.
• The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is investigating the sources of funding and other support flowing to groups espousing pro-Hamas propaganda and engaged in antisemitic harassment and intimidation of students. The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is the principal oversight committee of the US House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate “any matter” at “any time” under House Rule X.
• The Committee on Ways and Means has been investigating several universities since November 15, 2023, when the Committee held a hearing entitled From Ivory Towers to Dark Corners: Investigating the Nexus Between Antisemitism, Tax-Exempt Universities, and Terror Financing. The Committee followed the hearing with letters to those institutions on January 10, 202
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdfThiyagu K
This slides describes the basic concepts of ICT, basics of Email, Emerging Technology and Digital Initiatives in Education. This presentations aligns with the UGC Paper I syllabus.
Acetabularia Information For Class 9 .docxvaibhavrinwa19
Acetabularia acetabulum is a single-celled green alga that in its vegetative state is morphologically differentiated into a basal rhizoid and an axially elongated stalk, which bears whorls of branching hairs. The single diploid nucleus resides in the rhizoid.
Honest Reviews of Tim Han LMA Course Program.pptxtimhan337
Personal development courses are widely available today, with each one promising life-changing outcomes. Tim Han’s Life Mastery Achievers (LMA) Course has drawn a lot of interest. In addition to offering my frank assessment of Success Insider’s LMA Course, this piece examines the course’s effects via a variety of Tim Han LMA course reviews and Success Insider comments.
Model Attribute Check Company Auto PropertyCeline George
In Odoo, the multi-company feature allows you to manage multiple companies within a single Odoo database instance. Each company can have its own configurations while still sharing common resources such as products, customers, and suppliers.
Read| The latest issue of The Challenger is here! We are thrilled to announce that our school paper has qualified for the NATIONAL SCHOOLS PRESS CONFERENCE (NSPC) 2024. Thank you for your unwavering support and trust. Dive into the stories that made us stand out!
Operation “Blue Star” is the only event in the history of Independent India where the state went into war with its own people. Even after about 40 years it is not clear if it was culmination of states anger over people of the region, a political game of power or start of dictatorial chapter in the democratic setup.
The people of Punjab felt alienated from main stream due to denial of their just demands during a long democratic struggle since independence. As it happen all over the word, it led to militant struggle with great loss of lives of military, police and civilian personnel. Killing of Indira Gandhi and massacre of innocent Sikhs in Delhi and other India cities was also associated with this movement.
Welcome to TechSoup New Member Orientation and Q&A (May 2024).pdfTechSoup
In this webinar you will learn how your organization can access TechSoup's wide variety of product discount and donation programs. From hardware to software, we'll give you a tour of the tools available to help your nonprofit with productivity, collaboration, financial management, donor tracking, security, and more.
Examining Achievement and Satisfaction Using Cooperative & Collaborative Strategies in Blended & Online Environments
1. EXAMINING ACHIEVEMENT AND
SATISFACTION USING COOPERATIVE &
COLLABORATIVE STRATEGIES IN
BLENDED & ONLINE ENVIRONMENTS
Dr. Christine Nickel
Regent University
2. Problem
Increase in online and blended courses
Call for students to collaborate
Instructional Designers & instructors – want to use
group work, but how best to do it?
Blended or online?
Cooperative (more structure) or collaborative (less
structure)?
3. Research Literature
Cooperative Learning Collaborative Learning
More structure Less structure
More teacher controlled More learner controlled
• Assigned roles (division of • No assigned roles (students
labor) negotiate solutions together)
• Scaffolded teamwork skills • Teamwork skills are
• Group Processing promoted assumed
by instructor • Group processing is not
promoted
4. ECI 430/530
Instructional Technology Integration course
Redesigned module to include group project:
lesson plan with integrated technology
Course sections assigned to:
Cooperative: division of labor, scaffolding, group
processing
Collaborative: no division of labor, scaffolding or
group processing
6. ECI 430/530
Various Education students
Undergraduate and Master’s level
Age range under 20 to over 50
Varying experience with online learning
18 course sections (9 blended, 9 online), 254
students
Course delivery method self-selected
Learning strategy randomly assigned to course
sections
7. Treatment
1. Take pre-treatment survey
2. Read assigned module content
3. Meet with group on discussion board or chat and
discuss quiz review questions
4. As a group, create a lesson plan that uses group
learning strategies
5. Complete the lesson as a group but submit individually
6. Individually, take module quiz
7. Take post-treatment survey
8. Research Questions
Do course delivery method (blended vs. online)
and learning strategy (cooperative vs.
collaborative) differentially impact…
Individual achievement and group achievement
Process and solution satisfaction
Also examined:
Community of Inquiry perceptions
9. Individual Achievement
Do learning strategy & course delivery method
differentially impact students’ individual
achievement?
Quiz worth 15 points; Bloom’s remembering &
understanding levels
Performed a stepped ANCOVA
No interaction, no main effects
11. Group Achievement
Performed a stepped ANCOVA
Significant interaction F(1,183) = 21.36, p<.001, partial η2 =.105
Age and academic level also significant
Blended cooperative –
division of work without
showing work on group
discussion board?
Issues with rubric?
12. Group Achievement
ANCOVA, accounting for low & moderate
participation students
Significant interaction: F(1,176) = 11.584, p<.001,
partial η2= .065
Blended cooperative - still lower group project
grades
Age & academic level significantly influence DV
13. Process & Solution Satisfaction
Do learning strategy and course delivery
method differentially impact students’
satisfaction scores?
Adapted from Green & Taber (1980)
Stepped MANCOVA
No interaction, no main effects
14. Community of Inquiry
Do learning strategy and course delivery method differentially
impact students’ perceptions of teaching presence, social
presence, and cognitive presence in the project-based learning
activity?
Stepped MANCOVA Estimated Marginal Means for Teaching Presence
Main effect for course delivery
Wilks’ Λ = .93, F(3,176) = 4.312,
p<.01, partial η2=.068
Significant covariates: value of
connectedness, recognition of
collaboration potential, process
satisfaction, solution satisfaction
16. Conclusions
Cooperative & collaborative learning equally
effective for lower-level, individual achievement
Group achievement significantly influenced by
course delivery method and learning strategy
Course delivery method and learning strategy do
not significantly impact process and solution
satisfaction.
Blended cooperative students have lower
perceptions of the design of the module
17. Read more here…
Nickel, C.E. & Overbaugh, R.C. (2012). Cooperative
and Collaborative Strategies in Blended and Online
Learning Environments. In Z. Akyol & R. Garrison
(eds.), Educational communities of inquiry:
Theoretical framework, research and practice.
http://www.igi-global.com/chapter/cooperative-collabor
Book available in September.
Editor's Notes
- Universities continue to add online courses and programs. At the same time academia and industry are calling for students to gain collaboration skills. - Instructional designers and educators have been presented with the task of designing and developing effective group activities, yet research is mixed in regards to what types of approaches are the most successful in various contexts. Does it make a difference whether the learning environment is online or blended? Should they use cooperative or collaborative strategies?
The terms Cooperative and collaborative learning are sometimes used interchangeably, but they differ according to the amount of structure required. - Cooperative groups – group members required to take on one of the specific group roles (example: leader, checker, writer, prober) Extra scaffolding for promoting teamwork skills (tips on how to work as a team). Also group processing – students required to examine teamwork halfway through project and look for ways to improve Collaborative –no roles – students encouraged to negotiate and dialogue; no teamwork skill scaffolding, no group processing
The course used in this study was an Instructional Technology Integration course for undergraduate and graduate pre-service teachers. The treatment was a module redesigned to include a group project – a lesson plan with integrated technology Course sections was assigned to either the cooperative or collaborative strategy.
Research questions investigated whether course delivery method and strategy differentially impacted individual and group achievement and process and solution satisfaction. Student community of inquiry perceptions were also examined to further explain any differences in achievement or satisfaction.
Individual achievement was measured via a quiz made up of lower level cognitive questions. Findings suggest that neither course delivery method or learning strategy significantly influences quiz grades Rationale for no sig differences: No difference between course delivery methods or strategies because students were asked to review study questions on DB or chat. May have leveled the playing field because all treatment groups required to use technology to review for quiz. Instruction may be equally well designed for all treatments
Group achievement was measured through the use of a rubric to grade the group project. Notice that the cooperative blended students scored significantly less than the other 3 groups.
Sig interaction Blended collaborative students scored significantly higher than Blended cooperative students This led to questions as to whether blended cooperative students received lower scores on the rubric because they conversed more in lass and less on the discussion board (they didn’t “show their work” on the discussion board – a participation grae).
After accounting for low participation grades on the rubric an ANCOVA was performed. Findings are surprising, given blended cooperative students chance to see each other in class and the more detailed structure provided by cooperative strategy. It has been claimed that online students may suffer because of problems coordinating tasks virtually Cooperative structure should enhance group productivity and effectiveness But instead of collaborative students or online students scoring lower, the opposite happened. Inconsistent with various studies that found online learning had lower scores or studies that found no difference between learning strategies. Explanation: Blended cooperative students may not have engaged in higher level cognitive interactions – may have taken a “divide & conquer” strategy Cohen (1994) suggests that higher level learning may be more effective in a less structured environment because role assignments may constrain interaction and elaboration Why didn’t online cooperative students have the same issue, if role assignments were constraining? Maybe working online requires students to interact at a higher cognitive level and take on collaborative characteristics such as negotiation.
While numerous studies have measured student satisfaction in traditional, distance, and online learning, the results are somewhat ambiguous in regards to elements of the learning process that are less satisfying (Thompson & Coovert, 2003). Satisfaction measures often include a variety of questions that investigate everything from satisfaction with the technology, the group members, the discussion, the learning process, and the final project outcome or solution and report them as one score (Thompson & Coovert). If one wants to better understand differences in student satisfaction, using an instrument that further delineates student satisfaction would be most appropriate. For example, a student may be satisfied with the final outcome of a collaborative project, but not the collaboration process, or vice versa (Mejias, 2007). By distinguishing process and outcome satisfaction, inconsistencies in research may be resolved (Mejias). In the case of this study, the goal is to look at student satisfaction in regards to the process of collaborating or cooperating as a group and in terms of the final group solution to the problem. Process satisfaction “refers to the contentment with the interactions that occur while team members are deriving decisions” Solution satisfaction refers to a student’s “satisfaction with the solution…that resulted from the collaborative experience” (Ocker & Yaverbaum, 2001, p. 433). Results for process satisfaction are consistent with the findings of Francescato et al. (2006) who found no significant difference in satisfaction between face-to-face and online collaborative groups. However, the current research results are inconsistent with several previous studies that found that students engaged in an environment with a face-to-face component tended to be more satisfied with the group process than those who worked exclusively online (Ocker & Yaverbaum, 1999; Thompson & Coovert, 2003; Warkentin, et al., 1997). Additionally, other research found that students in more structured (cooperative) groups perceived higher group efficiency than students in less structured (collaborative) groups (Strijbos, Martens, Jochems, et al., 2004). The difference in the results of the current study and those of previous studies may be the time allowed for the group work. Several studies have noted that satisfaction with the collaboration process can increase over time (Flanagin, et al., 2004; Olaniran, 1996). While the instruction utilized in the present study has been characterized as short-term, it did last over a period of at least two weeks. Other studies that found significant differences in process satisfaction between delivery methods used much shorter amounts of time for their treatment, such as approximately two hours (Thompson & Coovert, 2003) or even 25 minutes (Warkentin, et al., 1997). Another explanation for the difference between results in the current study and that of previous research is the amount of computer-mediated interaction required for the activity. Several previous studies have compared online groups with groups that met entirely face-to-face (Olaniran, 1996; Straus & McGrath, 1994; Thompson & Coovert, 2003; Warkentin, et al., 1997; Whitman, et al., 2005). While one might reason that students enrolled in the blended course delivery method would tend to be more satisfied because they had the opportunity to meet face-to-face in class, the group activity required that students perform much of their interaction online. Therefore, any differences in process satisfaction between the course delivery methods that may have occurred due to difficulty communicating online and waiting for others to participate may have been negated, because students in all treatments were forced to deal with those communication issues. Results of the current study indicate that students’ solution satisfaction did not differ either by course delivery method or learning strategy. Moreover, mean scores for solution satisfaction were over four in a five-point Likert scale, indicating that students were quite satisfied with their groups’ solutions. This finding is consistent with previous studies, who found no significant difference in solution satisfaction between face-to-face and online groups (Benbunan-Fich & Hiltz, 1999; Fjermestad & Hiltz, 1998; Ocker & Yaverbaum, 1999) In the current study, the time limit for the group project seems to have been sufficient for the groups to negotiate a solution that left group members satisfied. Additionally, any issues students may have with the process of group work did not seem to affect their satisfaction with the outcome.
CoI – look at social dynamics, perceptions of critical thinking, perceptions of design An examination of the Tests of Between-Subjects Effects indicates that the only COI scale that significantly differed between the course delivery methods was teaching presence
The teaching presence subscale “design & organization” significantly differed. The interaction is disordinal in nature. More specifically, blended collaborative students responded more favorably in regard to the design and organization of the instruction than did blended cooperative students. Conversely, online cooperative students responded more favorably than did online collaborative students. Blended cooperative students have significantly lower perceptions of the design & organization teaching presence subscale. This echoes what was found in the group achievement research question.