http://goanimate4schools.com/player/embed/0X1jX_j51qeQ

Annotated Bibliography

Huang, X. “., & Hsiao, E. (2012). SYNCHRONOUS AND ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION IN AN ONLINE ENVIRONMENT: Faculty experiences and perceptions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 13(1), 15-30,49-50. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1034104731?accountid=14872

This study focuses on the instructor experience in the online environment. The study compared instructors who use only asynchronous interactions with instructors who use both synchronous and asynchronous interactions with students.

The study found that overall instructors had a positive experience in the online teaching environment. The information pointed to the use of asynchronous communication producing less confusion and more thoughtful responses from students. With email being the most common form of asynchronous communication. Instructors did perceive synchronous communications bring the students together.

Kienle, A. (2009). Intertwining synchronous and asynchronous communication to support collaborative learning–system design and evaluation. Education and Information Technologies, 14(1), 55-79. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10639-008-9065-9

This paper focuses on computer driven collaborative learning and the use of synchronous and asynchronous learning to collaborate. The paper did find limitations to the use of these communication forms. The paper concludes with suggestions on how to improve the use of synchronous and asynchronous communication in the computer driven collaborative space.

Landor-Ngemi, J. (2009). Student perceptions of an effective learning environment across the dimensions of synchronous, asynchronous, and face-to-face instruction (Order No. 3367178). Available from ProQuest Central. (304998414). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304998414?accountid=14872

This study investigates the student’s perception of content delivery using synchronous and asynchronous communication. The results of this study show students prefer asynchronous interaction rather than synchronous interaction from the instructor in the online learning environment.

Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. (2009). The impact of asynchronous and synchronous instruction and discussion on cognitive presence, social presence, teaching presence, and learning (Order No. 3370135). Available from ProQuest Central. (250918726). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/250918726?accountid=14872

This study looked at online learners who used asynchronous interactions and compared it to users who used a combination of synchronous and a synchronous learning. Although student perception remained the same for both groups the study provides evidence that a combination of these two approaches increase student learning.

Sistelos, A. (2008). Human-computer interaction and cognition in e-learning environments—the effects of synchronous and asynchronous communication in knowledge development. Indiana State University, ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing, 2008. 3354429.

This study explores e-learning and the cognitive affects of human-computer interactions. It focuses on the two forms of communication, synchronous and asynchronous learning. The study also observed student attitudes toward these two communication modes.

The used two groups given the same course. Group A used asynchronous communication during the course group B used synchronous communication. The students were given pre and post tests in order to access and gauge learning in the study. It was the findings of this study suggest that the synchronous group did better than the asynchronous group. With in the findings the researchers also found that students attitudes were not affected by the group they were placed in leading the researchers to believe that either asynchronous or synchronous communication, from a student perspective both are adequate methods to deliver content.

Somenarain, L., Akkaraju, S., & Gharbaran, R. (2010). Student perceptions and learning outcomes in asynchronous and synchronous online learning environments in a biology course. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 353. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1497198391?accountid=14872

This paper used three student groups to gather information: online asynchronous, online synchronous and a traditional class room group. The online synchronous group showed a slightly higher satisfaction rate with the course. The online groups showed a slightly higher but not significantly higher grade in this study than the traditional group.

Additional references:

Moodlemoot Keynotes(2015). Dr. Bart Rienties Retrieved from:

https://mootieuk15.moodlemoot.org/mod/page/view.php?id=34

Wikipedia (2015) Asynchronous Learning Retrieved from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asynchronous_learning

Wikipedia (2015). Synchronous Learning Retrieved from:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronous_learning

National University(2009) National University Classroom Teaching Video Student Engagement – Part 1. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVh3Ty6nZ5M

Blogs I replied to:

Ashley Dowdy

http://alperdistanceeducation.blogspot.com.br/

Static and Dynamic Technologies

MD5Assgn1gaviolak

There are a number of technologies we can use to enable learning and that list keeps growing. As Professor Moller states ”the instructor or instructional designer must make decisions regarding which technology to use to achieve specific learning outcomes” (Moller 2008).   I believe that there is room within the learning process for both static and dynamic technologies, which is why the continuum exists.

The static side is a great source for learners to gain initial knowledge or find relevant and pertinent information about a subject. The use of static technology supports the early stages of learning. Static technology is also a great reference source for those who have mastery.

The dynamic side of the continuum allows learners to gain a deeper understanding and mastery of the subject or process they are exploring. By manipulating the content and working with the new knowledge the learner is able to grow in their understanding of the concepts.

These technologies are used to support different stages of learning and I do not think we abandon one for another. This thought leads me to believe that I am toward the middle of this continuum. The static side of the continuum is used more often; therefore I have more exposure to the type of learning. For that reason I do need to develop ways to add dynamic learning techniques into instruction.

I attempt this whenever presented with a project. I try to assess what is needed to achieve the learning outcome and create learning that is reflective of this goal. That might mean starting with static learning to introduce a concept, then adding more dynamic elements to reinforce the learning experience.

It is interesting to me that Professor Moller identifies a middle ground. One of these technologies is the Learning Management System (LMS). This tool takes many forms and has many different types of user interface. The LMS, in my mind, can house the entire spectrum and I found it difficult to add it to my graphic; although I think it plays a key role in our current conception of online learning.

Reference:

Moller, L. (2008). Static and dynamic technological tools. [Unpublished Paper].

Blogs I posted to:

https://elizabethhurleyblog.wordpress.com

http://alperdistanceeducation.blogspot.com

Graphic

Slide1

Graphic

The use of technology to drive learning fascinates me both as a student and as a course developer. I am always looking to for ways, as a student, to use technology to improve my learning. I also constantly seek better avenues to assist students and instructors to improve the learning process.

We live in a world of information. For most of us content and information is at our figure tips 24/7 thanks to the advent of the smart phone. We can find how to videos on YouTube or access great lectures through TedTalks. We have the ability to use a number search engines to find and locate information whenever a question or curiosity captures our interest.

We can connect and communicate through multiple devices and platforms. Adobe connect, Google Hangouts and Big Blue Button are all services that allow use to connect with each other in real time over great distances.

We can exchange thoughts and ideas, learn from one another, and create meaningful projects with services like Dropbox, Wiki Spaces and Google Docs. These collaboration tools are easy to use and give all contributors’ quick access to group work.

The question isn’t if the tools exist that allow learners and instructors new and exciting ways to engage in education. The question is how do we use the available tools to create a learning experiences that works best for us and our learners?

I really like Siemens description of Curatorial Teaching. I think it fits well into our digital world as educators and content creators. We take all these tools and all this content and piece together a presentation that learners can interact with.   We give them access to the content, then we allow them the ability to work together to learn from each other guided by the instructor. Through these avenues they experience the content through communication and collaboration for the benefit of everyone involved.

Blogs I replied to:

https://orincarpenter.wordpress.com

https://marcipe.wordpress.com

Collaberation

Siemens talks about how students who are used to getting individual credit and praise for their work may not want to participate in the experience of collaboration.

Siemens video link:

https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_9094897_1&content_id=_26625102_1

I think we can go a little further with this and say these students have probably participated in group work before and been saddled with the bulk of the work. I do believe though as we progress and get older and are at higher levels in education there is a shift in student willingness to collaborate.

I believe our ability to collaborate is different depending on our experience and level of education.   I also don’t think we can make generalities for students when it comes to collaboration. A third grader will have a different ability and structure than a middle school student who has a different skill set than a high schooler and so on and so forth. The course set up will be greatly dependent on the students. I will say it again, knowing your learner and audience is vital. When ever creating any kind of learning analyzing the situation should be first on our list

One technique I have seen demonstrated to help assist the learning assessment process is a peer review of the individual contributions to the group. I believe that having a way to inform the instructor on how people approach the group effort helps the instructor when assessing individual work with in a group.

Here is a paper that addresses this subject:

http://course.zjnu.cn/kcjx/uploadfile/20081022205119741.pdf

Here is a video and blog demonstrating using collaboration in the school environment:

https://www.teachingchannel.org/blog/2015/01/30/give-students-the-lead-sbac/

I also believe that the instructor should try to figure out the prior knowledge and skill levels of the class and use that to create groups that will complement each other, whenever possible. Good group dynamics can make a big difference.

If a student is unwilling to work in a group I would attempt to figure out why and address that issue with them.   However, at the end of the day part of the grade will include how they work with others in a collaborative environment. If a student refuses to be part of that process then their grade should reflect that decision. At some point students need to be responsible and there is only so much a teacher can do to motivate students.

Blogs I commented on:

https://elizabethhurleyblog.wordpress.com

http://adavenporteducation.blogspot.com/2015/07/assessing-collaborative-efforts.html#comment-form

World Class

One of the amazing things, to me, is the evolution of education through the use of the Internet.  It has dramatically changed the way we connect. This connection happens in a variety of ways but I would like to specifically talk about how we connect globally and how that connection can have an impact on education.

20 years ago our ability to teach over a distance was limited at best.  To reach a majority of students in remote, under-serviced areas it took a commitment to travel and often relocate ones life.  This required a high level of commitment on the part of any willing teacher.  Now through the use of technology we can create interactions that we can take to many of these places without having to leave our lives.  Through this same medium we can also create real time learning experiences.  I truly believe that we are coming to a point in time when we can take the best teachers and content experts and put their knowledge on the Internet and truly educate anyone anywhere.

There are a number of people working to expand this very concept. One major example is The Khan Academy who’s very mission statement is this:

“Our mission is to provide a free, world-class education for anyone, anywhere.” https://www.khanacademy.org/about

I was listening to TedTalks over the weekend and came across a talk by Daphne Koller, one of the people responsible for Coursera. If you are not familiar with Coursera , they are a provider of MOOC’s. She discusses, among other things, the vision of offering educational experiences to improve ones life through the Internet without the limitations of physical proximity. She also highlights parts of the world where this type of offering is being used to the advantage of students. http://www.ted.com/talks/daphne_koller_what_we_re_learning_from_online_education?language=en

I truly believe if we do this right and have enough interest we can revolutionize how we educate the world. There are people on this planet who desperately want an education. They will line up in droves just for the opportunity so many of us take for granted. We have the ability to lift people up through the use of technology in education and make a real difference on a global scale.

Blog Log:

Module 2

Elizabeth Hurley

https://elizabethhurleyblog.wordpress.com/2015/06/22/module-2/comment-page-1/#comment-5

Mustafa Sarli

http://alperdistanceeducation.blogspot.com.br/

Evolve or Die

  • After reading the three articles by Moller, Huett, Foshay and Coleman, and listening to the Simonson video programs, compare and contrast the reasons these authors believe there is a need to evolve distance education to the next generation. Do you agree with their positions? Why or why not?

We currently live in a world driven by information and ease of communication. This has caused a massive shift in how we interact with each other and the world. This has also resulted in a major change in how many of us, and our children, expect to view and engage with content. Websites like YouTube create an environment were we can create and share our own content and experiences. For more please visit: http://www.adweek.com/socialtimes/youtube-changed-the-world/27206.

I believe that now is a great time to look at how we learn and make changes in education that reflect the way in which the world is transforming. Like (Moller, Huett, Foshay and Coleman, 2008) I too believe that ID can play a major role in this shift.

As an ID professional and technology advocate, I do think there is a real need to make sure what is being produced for technology in education is of the highest quality. Here is another article that speaks to quality control from the eLearning Coach: http://theelearningcoach.com/elearning_design/quality-control-for-online-training/.

I believe that in order to make a lasting impact, there needs to be a commonly understood standard, one in which the public is also educated, that allows everyone to easily distinguish between quality and poor design. Most of us can recognize when we are taking a good class or when the class we are taking is poor quality and design. We simply need to define those good characteristics and educate people to expect that standard.

Simonson also talks about equivalency theory. At first glance I really like what this says about the content being equal but in a different shape. I would expand on that more as I believe that online learning through technology can not only cover the same material, but cover it in a deeper manner. This enables the learner to have a more meaningful and lasting learning experience. Simonson compares this theory to surface area in geometry, but I think that by using this comparison it is possible to design better volume in an online format with the right approach and recourses (Laureate Education, Inc. 2008)

I often hear talk about making the online version match or mirror the classroom experience and how some things just don’t translate. I believe this is true. I also think that we need to stop worrying about making the online experience match the classroom and ask ourselves how can we make it better?

I know of teaching institutions that have their instructors create and manage their individual online classes. I believe this is a mistake. The articles discuss this in detail and I believe a team approach to this design is better for everyone. When you divide this work amongst SME’s and IDer’s I believe the end product is of higher quality and better suited for the student (Moller, Huett, Foshay and Coleman, 2008).

I firmly believe that the way in which we acquire, use and disseminate information has fundamentally changed. As educators we can either get in front of this change and use it to drive our approach to education or we can let it pass us by. In the end it is our choice what we do, the world will evolve with or without us.

References:

Laureate Education, Inc. (2008). Principles of distance education: Equivalency theory.Baltimore, MD: Author.

Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the Web. TechTrends,