Online Student Course Evaluation Systems: Effective Strategies and Best Practices
The study evaluates online course evaluation systems and explores faculty and student experiences, perceptions, and preferences for evaluation. In addition, traditional constructs such as response rates, quality of responses, and access are also evaluated. Results of the study provide an effective basis for institutional decision-making, and provide practical evidence for assuring the best course evaluation data possible. Experiences and best practices for implementation of online student course evaluations in higher education will be also highlighted.
Abstract: (Click here to enhance readability)
Introduction Student course evaluations of teaching are a time-honored tradition within most higher education institutions. For administrators, they are important indicators of course and curriculum quality, and often weigh heavily in tenure and promotion decisions. In addition, they can be used on an individual basis for teaching and course improvement (Brown et al. 1997; Brockbank & McGill 1998). Because of their importance in instructional and institutional decision-making student evaluations of teaching have become a deep-rooted institutional fixture. Early investigations of course evaluation methods (paper-based vs. online) have yielded some interesting and distressing results. Perhaps the most universal difference reported is a lower response rate (Baum et. al. 2001; Hardy 2003; Carini et. al. 2003; Sax et. al. 2002) which faculty fear can contribute to non-response negative bias, however fears are often over exaggerated. Other studies, however, report that the differences in response rate have narrowed over time (Johnson 2002; Thorpe 2002). Another difference noted by a number of studies is a higher quality of written responses in online student course evaluations (Johnson 2002; Kasiar et al. 2001; Layne et al. 1999; Ravelli 2000). From a pedagogical perspective, one example illustrates how online course evaluation systems can help facilitate improvements in teaching and learning practices by providing more timely access to evaluation results (Tucker et al. 2003). From an administrative perspective there are demonstrated benefits as well, such as significant cost savings in time and materials. For example, one study found that staff workload decreased from approximately 30 hours spent on paper-based evaluations down to just 1 hour spent with online evaluations (Kasiar et al. 2001). Still it is not clear that the best practices and practical evidence from this body of research has benefited institutional adoption and implementation of online course evaluation systems, given the slow adoption of these systems compared to other educational technologies in higher education. The study intends to understand faculty and student experiences, perceptions, and preferences in regard to course evaluations, while also providing an updated evaluation of traditional constructs collected in earlier studies such as, response time, response quality, and response rate. Theoretical Framework In order to grasp this complex nature of any organization, the current study utilizes a socio-technical approach as the primary theoretical perspective. This approach suggests that both the social and technical aspects are equally important when implementing, using, or evaluating information technology (Kling et al. 2003). The conceptualization of educational technology systems as a socio-technical system is further supported by Moore & Kearsley (1996), who suggest that educational technologies are complex systems that involve a wide variety of technological, organizational, social, and instructional components. In an effort to conceptualize an online student course evaluation system as socio-technical system (STS) it is useful to note the important social and technological aspects that define it. An STS is comprised of identifiable populations, groups, incentives, actors, undesired interactions, flows, and choice points (Kling et al. 2003). It is our belief that the socio-technical approach will provide a framework to more thoroughly determine the advantages and disadvantages of online course evaluations, and will enable better procedures and best practices within our results by accounting for all aspects of the system. Importance of Study As recent as five years ago, few colleges and universities were using online student course evaluations of teaching. In fact, a recent report on higher education indicates that only 1% of the nation’s most “wired” universities reported institution-wide uses of online course evaluations systems (Hmieleski 2000) even though most of their other systems are highly technological including: the extensive use of learning management systems, email communication, podcasting, blogs, wikis and wireless technologies (Carlson 2005; Hoffman 2003). Along with the overall increase in the use of technology in all aspects of higher education, many recognize there are significant advantages to using online student course evaluations systems including: ease and economy of administration, more detailed and thoughtful student responses, more accurate data collection and reporting, more class time, and more timely instructor access to results (Johnson 2002; Hardy 2003; Kasiar et al. 2001; Layne et al. 1999; Ravelli 2000). This change is driven not only by the administration, in effort to save costs and boost staff productivity, but also by the students themselves who increasingly demand the latest technologies (Carlson 2005). The study utilizes a mixed methods approach and provides a combination of data gathered via survey, as well as student evaluation data from both paper-based and online evaluations in order to uncover advantages and disadvantages regarding the use of online course evaluations. Data has been collected from a purposeful sample of in-class, paper-based, course evaluations (N=45), and from a random sample of online course evaluations (N=95). All courses and participants are from a School of Education at a large midwestern state university. Survey and qualitative data have been collected from instructors and students, and data has been mined from the universities learning management system to provide triangulation on several of the studies constructs. A series of qualitative interviews have also been conducted with a small subset of student and faculty participants. Preliminary results indicate positive outcomes with the schools pilot implementation of online course evaluations using the STS approach in regard to faculty and student experiences and preferences, and are in-line with that of other campus educational technologies. Response rates, response time and response quality also indicate overall positive trends and yield some interesting findings. Completed results will help instructional technologists, and educational organizations apply best practices for implementing online course evaluation systems as socio-technical systems, as well as provide strategies for those that would like to improve upon current course evaluation practices. Conclusion There is a need for current research on this topic given the changing technology climate and apparent lag of online course evaluation system implementation by higher education institutions. The current study will step beyond previous comparison studies to evaluate online course evaluation system use while also exploring the reality of faculty and student experiences, perceptions, and preferences. The results of this study will provide best practices for implementation of online student course evaluations in higher education. References Brockbank, A., & McGill, I. (1998). Facilitating Reflective Learning in Higher Education. Bristol, England: Open University Press. Brown, S., Race, P., and Smith, B. 500 Tips for Quality Enhancement in Universities and Colleges. London, England: Kogan Page, 1997 Baum, P., Chapman, K. S., Dommeyer, C.J. & Hanna, R. W. (2001) Online versus in-class student evaluations of faculty, paper presented at the Hawaii Conference on Business, Honolulu. Carini, R. M., Hayek, J. C., Kuh, G. D., & Ouimet, J. A. (2003). College student responses to web and paper surveys: does mode matter? Research in Higher Education, 44(1), 1–19. Carlson, S. (2005). The net generation goes to college. The Chronicle of Higher Education, Information Technology. Retrieved December 4, 2007 from http://chronicle.com/weekly/v52/i07/07a03401.htm Dommeyer, C. J., Baum, P., Hanna, R. W., & Chapman, K. S. (2002). Attitudes of business faculty toward two methods of collecting teaching evaluations: paper vs. online. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(5), 611-624. Hmieleski, K. (2000). Barriers to online evaluation: Surveying the nation’s top 200 most wired colleges. Interactive and Distance Education Assessment Laboratory, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (Unpublished Report): Troy, N.Y. Hoffman, K. M. (2003). Online course evaluation and reporting in higher education. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 96, 25-30. Hardy, N. (2003) Online ratings: Fact and fiction. In D. L. Sorenson and T.D. Johnson (Eds.), New directions for Teaching and Learning, 96 (4) 31-38. Johnson, R. (2002) “Online Student Ratings: Will Students Respond?” In D. L. Sorenson and T.D. Johnson (Eds.), New directions for Teaching and Learning, 96 (4), 49-59. Kling, R., McKim, G., & King, A. (2003). A bit more to IT: Scholarly communication forums as socio-technical interaction networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(1), 47-67. Kasiar, J. B., Schroeder, S. L., & Holstad, S. G. (2001). Comparison of traditional and web-based course evaluation processes in a required, team-taught pharmacotherapy course. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 63(2), 68-70. Layne, B. H., DeCristofor, J. R., & McGinty, D. (1999). Electronic versus traditional student ratings of instruction. Research in Higher Education, 40(2), 221-32. Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance Education: A Systems View, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Sax, L., Gilmartin, S., Keup, J., Bryant, A. and Plecha, M. (2002). Findings from the 2001 pilot administration of Your First College Year: National norms. Higher Education Research Institute, University of California. Retrieved December 7, 2007 from http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/heri/yfcy/yfcy_report_02.pdf Ravelli, B. (2000). Anonymous online teaching assessments: Preliminary findings. Paper presented at: Annual National Conference of the American Association for Higher Education, June 14-18, 2000, Charlotte, North Carolina. Tucker, B., Jones, S., Straker, L., & Cole, J. (2003). Course evaluation on the web: Facilitating student and teacher reflection to improve learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 96(Winter), 81-94.
Friday, February 20, 2009
working across multiple disciplines
An Odd Assortment of People: Benefits of Working and Learning Across Multiple Disciplines
This presentation includes a discussion of how university researchers and instructors were recruited from multiple disciplines in order to implement an integrative and interdisciplinary learning environment for high school students. The high school students learned several science and technology topics related to hurricanes and produced a multimedia documentary of personal experiences with Hurricane Katrina. A discussion of the results and benefits to all participants is also included.
Abstract: (Click here to enhance readability)
PURPOSE The purpose of this presentation is to discuss how to recruit interdisciplinary researchers and instructors and design and manage an interdisciplinary learning environment that is grounded on relevant research and theory. The project for discussion included instructional design and development faculty, instructional design and development graduate students, teacher education and media specialist graduate students, and counselor educators from a College of Education; faculty from meteorology from a College of Arts and Sciences; graduate assistants from a College of Engineering; a high school principal; and professionals in the community (television newscasters, videographers, and an area water system administrator). The learning environment involved a high school/university collaboration where students learned several science and information technology topics related to hurricanes and produced a multimedia documentary of personal experiences with Hurricane Katrina. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK The design of the learning environment was grounded on relevant research and theory that included Keller’s (1987) ARCS Model of Motivation, analysis of critical incidents requiring contribution from several different disciplines (Carter, Kang, & Taggart, 1999), links between informal and school-based learning (La Velle, McFarlane, & Brawn, 2003; Reynolds, Treharne, & Tripp, 2003), and constructive activities related to the disaster that are helpful to people who experienced the disaster (Lazarus, Jimerson, & Brock, 2002; Vernberg & Vogel, 1993). The learning environment was designed so that students participated in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) experiences that were relevant to what happened in their lives as a result of the hurricane. METHODS Strategies for designing the learning environment were developed before the project was conceived. For example, seeking out knowledge of potential interdisciplinary collaborators must be at the forefront of the plan. With knowledge of the work of others in mind, the next step is to initiate a discussion. This begins the collaboration process and one discussion leads to other contacts and discussions. In addition to the university faculty involved in the project, most of the graduate assistants working on the project were teachers and/or media specialists enrolled in a graduate educational research class. The graduate assistants’ participation was associated with an optional assignment for the class. The project provided an opportunity for the graduate assistants to collaborate and conduct research with the university faculty and high school students in a technology-enhanced learning environment. The graduate students also had the opportunity to gather information about student motivation in science and information technology, the use of digital technologies, the design of learner-centered activities, and the management of a technology-enhanced learning environment. DATA SOURCES In this particular instance, knowledge of interdisciplinary collaborators came from colleagues within the Instructional Design and Development program and Counselor Education program in the College of Education. Knowledge of other interdisciplinary collaborators from other colleges came from paying attention to sources of information such as internal university news reports of special projects undertaken by faculty throughout the university, announcements at organization-wide meetings, and articles of special interest in local newspapers. For the purposes of studying the effectiveness of the project, several instruments were used that included the Attitude Toward Science and Mathematics Scale (Teshome, Maushak, & Athreya, 2001), the Computer Attitude Questionnaire (Knezek, Christensen, & Miyashita, 2000, the Impact of Event Scale - Revised (Horowitz, Wilner, & Alvarez, 1979; Sundin & Horowitz, 2003; Weiss & Marmar, 1997), the Hostility-SCL-90, the Modified Depression Scale, reports of interviews with students who participated in the project, reports of interviews conducted by the students themselves within the community, and students’ written reports of their experiences in the class. Evaluation instruments such as those just described are often used in design and development research studies (Richey & Klein, 2007). RESULTS The results of the interdisciplinary recruitment led to the inclusion of instructional design and development faculty, instructional design and development graduate students, teacher education and media specialist graduate students, and counselor educators from a College of Education; faculty from meteorology from a College of Arts and Sciences; graduate assistants from a College of Engineering; a high school principal; and professionals in the community (television newscasters, videographers, and an area water system administrator). Just as important, the students participating in the project worked in a highly collaborative environment. The development of the final hurricane documentary was a collaborative effort of the high school students, the graduate students, and the university faculty. In addition, the digital photos and videos taken during learning activities serve as a chronicle and evidence of the integrative science and technology standards met with this project. IMPLICATIONS FOR SECONDARY EDUCATION This project required the use of information technology within applications of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. The high school students received guidance and instruction from university faculty and professional role models from a variety of disciplines. The students fulfilled actual work requirements that included critical thinking and problem solving, gathering and analyzing information, communicating orally and in writing, collaborating with culturally diverse members of a team, and organizing and presenting information with the use of information technology. IMPLICATIONS FOR GRADUATE TEACHER EDUCATION Most of the graduate assistants working on this project were teachers and/or media specialists enrolled in a graduate educational research class. The graduate assistants’ participation was associated with an optional assignment for the class. This project provided an opportunity for the graduate assistants to collaborate and conduct research with the university faculty and high school students in a technology-enhanced learning environment. The graduate students also had the opportunity to gather information about student motivation in science and information technology, the use of digital technologies, the design of learner-centered activities, and the management of a technology-enhanced learning environment. REFERENCES Carter, S., Kang, M., & Taggart, R. (1999). An interdisciplinary approach to a critical incident course. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 54(2) 4 – 14. Horowitz, M., Wilner, N., & Alvarez, W. (1979). Impact of Event Scale: A measure of subjective stress. Psychosomatic Medicine, 41(3), 209 – 218. Keller, J. M. (1987). Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn. Performance & Instruction, 26(8), 1 – 7. Knezek, G., Christensen, R., & Miyashita, K. (2000). Instruments for assessing attitudes toward information technology (2nd ed.). Institute for the Integration of Technology into Teaching and Learning, University of North Texas. Retrieved February 5, 2009, from http://www.iittl.unt.edu/IITTL/newiittl/iittl_instruments/caq/iittl_caq_main.html La Velle, L. B., McFarlane, A., & Brawn, R. (2003). Knowledge transformation through ICT in science education: A case study in teacher-driven curriculum development – case-study 1. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(2), 183 – 199. Lazarus, P. J., Jimerson, S. R., & Brock, S. E. (2002). Best practices in school crisis prevention and intervention. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. Reynolds, D., Treharne, D., & Tripp, H. (2003). ICT – the hopes and the reality. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(2), 151 – 167. Richey, R. C., & Klein, J. D. (2007). Design and development research: Methods, strategies, and issues. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Sundin, E. C., & Horowitz, M. J. (2003). Horowitz’s Impact of Event Scale evaluation of 20 years of use. Psychosomatic Medicine, 65(8), 870 – 876. Teshome, Y., Maushak, N., & Athreya, K. (2001). Attitude toward informal science and math: A survey of boys and girls participating in hands-on science and math (FUNTIVITIES). Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 7(1), 59 – 74. Vernberg, E. M., & Vogel, J. M. (1993). Part 2: Interventions with children after disasters. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 22(4), 485-498. Weiss, D. S., & Marmar, C. R. (1997). The Impact of Event Scale – Revised. In J. P. Wilson & T. M. Keane (Eds.), Assessing psychological trauma and PTSD (pp. 399 – 411). New York: Guilford.
This presentation includes a discussion of how university researchers and instructors were recruited from multiple disciplines in order to implement an integrative and interdisciplinary learning environment for high school students. The high school students learned several science and technology topics related to hurricanes and produced a multimedia documentary of personal experiences with Hurricane Katrina. A discussion of the results and benefits to all participants is also included.
Abstract: (Click here to enhance readability)
PURPOSE The purpose of this presentation is to discuss how to recruit interdisciplinary researchers and instructors and design and manage an interdisciplinary learning environment that is grounded on relevant research and theory. The project for discussion included instructional design and development faculty, instructional design and development graduate students, teacher education and media specialist graduate students, and counselor educators from a College of Education; faculty from meteorology from a College of Arts and Sciences; graduate assistants from a College of Engineering; a high school principal; and professionals in the community (television newscasters, videographers, and an area water system administrator). The learning environment involved a high school/university collaboration where students learned several science and information technology topics related to hurricanes and produced a multimedia documentary of personal experiences with Hurricane Katrina. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK The design of the learning environment was grounded on relevant research and theory that included Keller’s (1987) ARCS Model of Motivation, analysis of critical incidents requiring contribution from several different disciplines (Carter, Kang, & Taggart, 1999), links between informal and school-based learning (La Velle, McFarlane, & Brawn, 2003; Reynolds, Treharne, & Tripp, 2003), and constructive activities related to the disaster that are helpful to people who experienced the disaster (Lazarus, Jimerson, & Brock, 2002; Vernberg & Vogel, 1993). The learning environment was designed so that students participated in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) experiences that were relevant to what happened in their lives as a result of the hurricane. METHODS Strategies for designing the learning environment were developed before the project was conceived. For example, seeking out knowledge of potential interdisciplinary collaborators must be at the forefront of the plan. With knowledge of the work of others in mind, the next step is to initiate a discussion. This begins the collaboration process and one discussion leads to other contacts and discussions. In addition to the university faculty involved in the project, most of the graduate assistants working on the project were teachers and/or media specialists enrolled in a graduate educational research class. The graduate assistants’ participation was associated with an optional assignment for the class. The project provided an opportunity for the graduate assistants to collaborate and conduct research with the university faculty and high school students in a technology-enhanced learning environment. The graduate students also had the opportunity to gather information about student motivation in science and information technology, the use of digital technologies, the design of learner-centered activities, and the management of a technology-enhanced learning environment. DATA SOURCES In this particular instance, knowledge of interdisciplinary collaborators came from colleagues within the Instructional Design and Development program and Counselor Education program in the College of Education. Knowledge of other interdisciplinary collaborators from other colleges came from paying attention to sources of information such as internal university news reports of special projects undertaken by faculty throughout the university, announcements at organization-wide meetings, and articles of special interest in local newspapers. For the purposes of studying the effectiveness of the project, several instruments were used that included the Attitude Toward Science and Mathematics Scale (Teshome, Maushak, & Athreya, 2001), the Computer Attitude Questionnaire (Knezek, Christensen, & Miyashita, 2000, the Impact of Event Scale - Revised (Horowitz, Wilner, & Alvarez, 1979; Sundin & Horowitz, 2003; Weiss & Marmar, 1997), the Hostility-SCL-90, the Modified Depression Scale, reports of interviews with students who participated in the project, reports of interviews conducted by the students themselves within the community, and students’ written reports of their experiences in the class. Evaluation instruments such as those just described are often used in design and development research studies (Richey & Klein, 2007). RESULTS The results of the interdisciplinary recruitment led to the inclusion of instructional design and development faculty, instructional design and development graduate students, teacher education and media specialist graduate students, and counselor educators from a College of Education; faculty from meteorology from a College of Arts and Sciences; graduate assistants from a College of Engineering; a high school principal; and professionals in the community (television newscasters, videographers, and an area water system administrator). Just as important, the students participating in the project worked in a highly collaborative environment. The development of the final hurricane documentary was a collaborative effort of the high school students, the graduate students, and the university faculty. In addition, the digital photos and videos taken during learning activities serve as a chronicle and evidence of the integrative science and technology standards met with this project. IMPLICATIONS FOR SECONDARY EDUCATION This project required the use of information technology within applications of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. The high school students received guidance and instruction from university faculty and professional role models from a variety of disciplines. The students fulfilled actual work requirements that included critical thinking and problem solving, gathering and analyzing information, communicating orally and in writing, collaborating with culturally diverse members of a team, and organizing and presenting information with the use of information technology. IMPLICATIONS FOR GRADUATE TEACHER EDUCATION Most of the graduate assistants working on this project were teachers and/or media specialists enrolled in a graduate educational research class. The graduate assistants’ participation was associated with an optional assignment for the class. This project provided an opportunity for the graduate assistants to collaborate and conduct research with the university faculty and high school students in a technology-enhanced learning environment. The graduate students also had the opportunity to gather information about student motivation in science and information technology, the use of digital technologies, the design of learner-centered activities, and the management of a technology-enhanced learning environment. REFERENCES Carter, S., Kang, M., & Taggart, R. (1999). An interdisciplinary approach to a critical incident course. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 54(2) 4 – 14. Horowitz, M., Wilner, N., & Alvarez, W. (1979). Impact of Event Scale: A measure of subjective stress. Psychosomatic Medicine, 41(3), 209 – 218. Keller, J. M. (1987). Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn. Performance & Instruction, 26(8), 1 – 7. Knezek, G., Christensen, R., & Miyashita, K. (2000). Instruments for assessing attitudes toward information technology (2nd ed.). Institute for the Integration of Technology into Teaching and Learning, University of North Texas. Retrieved February 5, 2009, from http://www.iittl.unt.edu/IITTL/newiittl/iittl_instruments/caq/iittl_caq_main.html La Velle, L. B., McFarlane, A., & Brawn, R. (2003). Knowledge transformation through ICT in science education: A case study in teacher-driven curriculum development – case-study 1. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(2), 183 – 199. Lazarus, P. J., Jimerson, S. R., & Brock, S. E. (2002). Best practices in school crisis prevention and intervention. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. Reynolds, D., Treharne, D., & Tripp, H. (2003). ICT – the hopes and the reality. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(2), 151 – 167. Richey, R. C., & Klein, J. D. (2007). Design and development research: Methods, strategies, and issues. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Sundin, E. C., & Horowitz, M. J. (2003). Horowitz’s Impact of Event Scale evaluation of 20 years of use. Psychosomatic Medicine, 65(8), 870 – 876. Teshome, Y., Maushak, N., & Athreya, K. (2001). Attitude toward informal science and math: A survey of boys and girls participating in hands-on science and math (FUNTIVITIES). Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 7(1), 59 – 74. Vernberg, E. M., & Vogel, J. M. (1993). Part 2: Interventions with children after disasters. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 22(4), 485-498. Weiss, D. S., & Marmar, C. R. (1997). The Impact of Event Scale – Revised. In J. P. Wilson & T. M. Keane (Eds.), Assessing psychological trauma and PTSD (pp. 399 – 411). New York: Guilford.
online blogging and voting
Transforming Learning and Instruction through an Online Blogging and Voting Environment
Using blogs in higher education is becoming commonplace. Many educators are using blogs to increase student interaction with their peers. However, is there a right way to design and implement an online blogging environment? This presentation introduces a blogging environment that allows students to comment and vote on their peers’ entries, thus enabling them to dictate the classroom discussion based on their votes. The environment is created using Pligg: an Open Source Content Sharing and Rating System.
Abstract: (Click here to enhance readability)
INTRODUCTION Blogging (i.e. web logging) as an educational tool is a hot topic. Many researchers have commented and provided research on how we blog and the uses of blogs as learning spaces in higher education (Nardi et. al., 2004; Williams and Jacobs, 2004). In their article, Williams and Jacobs state that “blogs have the potential, at least, to be a truly transformational technology in that they provide students with a high level of autonomy while simultaneously providing opportunity for greater interaction with peers” (2004). The benefits for using blogs and commenting on blogs in higher education are apparent. There is evidence that the blogging world and educational uses of blogging are continuing to expand (Williams and Jacobs, 2004). All educators, not only higher education, must respond to this evidence by becoming familiar with the design and implementation of online blogging environments. However, what does the design of a blogging system for use in higher education look like? There are several similar questions that must be answered. How do we design a blog system that provides an "opportunity for greater interaction with peers" (2004)? How do we enhance the class discussion utilizing topics that are discussed and commented on in the blogging environment? How do we provide students with the resources and skills needed to easily acclimate with a blogging system and buy-in to the use of a blogging system as part of the classroom environment? This presentation will provide the answers to these questions through the demonstration of the design and implementation of a blogging system used during the spring 2009 semester in an educational technology course. The course entitled Instructional Technology for Educators was comprised of twenty-five undergraduate education majors. In a pre-use survey, twenty of the students had never heard of or never used blogs before. There were three goals in the design of the online blogging system. The first goal of the blogging system was to create an environment where students could login, view, and comment on every blog entry from class on one site, eliminating the need to enter multiple URL addresses to comment on their peers’ entries. The second goal was to create an environment where students could vote on entries that they would like to discuss in class, thus leading to student participation in the class discussions. Finally, the third goal was to provide students with the resources and skills needed to easily access and gain familiarity with the blogging environment. The design of the system relied on the use and knowledge of open source content management systems. Two open source systems were selected for use. First, Movable Type was used as part of the university blogging system to allow students to submit blog entries on their own personal university space. Second, Pligg was used to aggregate student blog entries to one website and provide the tools to vote and comment on the entries. Each week during the semester, students were required to submit a blog summary and critique in response to a reading on a topic in instructional technology. Student entries were aggregated using the Pligg site. Once aggregated, students were able to go into the open source system and vote on and comment on blog entries from other students. The voting system was then used to lead and guide class discussions during the in-class portion of course. In other words, each week the instructor would highlight posts that had multiple votes and use them as conversation starters in class. METHOD In-use, and post-use surveys will be completed by the students about their experiences with and perceptions of using the blogging system by the end of April. This presentation will include the results from the survey data. The student responses will provide valuable information on students’ perceptions and uses of an online blogging environment. Attendees will gain valuable information on how to design, set up and implement an online blogging environment that enables commenting and voting on student blog entries. In addition, attendees will be given the knowledge and tools to stay current with the use of blogging in education and will leave knowing how to design a blogging system that provides an opportunity for "greater interaction with peers", enhances the class discussion utilizing topics that were voted on in the blogging environment, and provides students with the resources and skills needed to easily acclimate with a blogging system and buy-in to the use of a blogging system as part of the classroom environment. SOURCES Nardi, B.A., Schiano, D.J., Gumbrecht, M., and Swartz, L. (2004). Why We Blog. Communications of the ACM. 47 (12), 41-46. Williams, J.B. and Jacobs, J. (2004). Exploring the use of blogs as learning spaces in the higher educator sector. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 20 (2), 232-247.
Using blogs in higher education is becoming commonplace. Many educators are using blogs to increase student interaction with their peers. However, is there a right way to design and implement an online blogging environment? This presentation introduces a blogging environment that allows students to comment and vote on their peers’ entries, thus enabling them to dictate the classroom discussion based on their votes. The environment is created using Pligg: an Open Source Content Sharing and Rating System.
Abstract: (Click here to enhance readability)
INTRODUCTION Blogging (i.e. web logging) as an educational tool is a hot topic. Many researchers have commented and provided research on how we blog and the uses of blogs as learning spaces in higher education (Nardi et. al., 2004; Williams and Jacobs, 2004). In their article, Williams and Jacobs state that “blogs have the potential, at least, to be a truly transformational technology in that they provide students with a high level of autonomy while simultaneously providing opportunity for greater interaction with peers” (2004). The benefits for using blogs and commenting on blogs in higher education are apparent. There is evidence that the blogging world and educational uses of blogging are continuing to expand (Williams and Jacobs, 2004). All educators, not only higher education, must respond to this evidence by becoming familiar with the design and implementation of online blogging environments. However, what does the design of a blogging system for use in higher education look like? There are several similar questions that must be answered. How do we design a blog system that provides an "opportunity for greater interaction with peers" (2004)? How do we enhance the class discussion utilizing topics that are discussed and commented on in the blogging environment? How do we provide students with the resources and skills needed to easily acclimate with a blogging system and buy-in to the use of a blogging system as part of the classroom environment? This presentation will provide the answers to these questions through the demonstration of the design and implementation of a blogging system used during the spring 2009 semester in an educational technology course. The course entitled Instructional Technology for Educators was comprised of twenty-five undergraduate education majors. In a pre-use survey, twenty of the students had never heard of or never used blogs before. There were three goals in the design of the online blogging system. The first goal of the blogging system was to create an environment where students could login, view, and comment on every blog entry from class on one site, eliminating the need to enter multiple URL addresses to comment on their peers’ entries. The second goal was to create an environment where students could vote on entries that they would like to discuss in class, thus leading to student participation in the class discussions. Finally, the third goal was to provide students with the resources and skills needed to easily access and gain familiarity with the blogging environment. The design of the system relied on the use and knowledge of open source content management systems. Two open source systems were selected for use. First, Movable Type was used as part of the university blogging system to allow students to submit blog entries on their own personal university space. Second, Pligg was used to aggregate student blog entries to one website and provide the tools to vote and comment on the entries. Each week during the semester, students were required to submit a blog summary and critique in response to a reading on a topic in instructional technology. Student entries were aggregated using the Pligg site. Once aggregated, students were able to go into the open source system and vote on and comment on blog entries from other students. The voting system was then used to lead and guide class discussions during the in-class portion of course. In other words, each week the instructor would highlight posts that had multiple votes and use them as conversation starters in class. METHOD In-use, and post-use surveys will be completed by the students about their experiences with and perceptions of using the blogging system by the end of April. This presentation will include the results from the survey data. The student responses will provide valuable information on students’ perceptions and uses of an online blogging environment. Attendees will gain valuable information on how to design, set up and implement an online blogging environment that enables commenting and voting on student blog entries. In addition, attendees will be given the knowledge and tools to stay current with the use of blogging in education and will leave knowing how to design a blogging system that provides an opportunity for "greater interaction with peers", enhances the class discussion utilizing topics that were voted on in the blogging environment, and provides students with the resources and skills needed to easily acclimate with a blogging system and buy-in to the use of a blogging system as part of the classroom environment. SOURCES Nardi, B.A., Schiano, D.J., Gumbrecht, M., and Swartz, L. (2004). Why We Blog. Communications of the ACM. 47 (12), 41-46. Williams, J.B. and Jacobs, J. (2004). Exploring the use of blogs as learning spaces in the higher educator sector. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 20 (2), 232-247.
web 2.0 international experiences
SHOWCASE: Using Web 2.0 Applications to Engage Students in International Experiences
In an attempt to increase students’ information and communication technology (ICT) skills, as well as promote collaboration across cultures, a collaborative wiki development project was implemented. As part of an introductory technology course, students (n=244) worked collaboratively with their classmates as well as with individuals from various countries to create a shared wikibook that explored Web 2.0 technologies. We report on the efficacy of using this approach to engage students in international collaborations, including the impact on students’ motivation and confidence, as well as changes in their perceptions of cultural and technological competency.
Abstract: (Click here to view other format again)
PROJECT SUMMARYA Web 2.0 project was created to promote information and communication technologies (ICT) literacy as well as student collaboration within a globalized era. Students worked collaboratively with peers within the course as well as with individuals from various countries to explore Web 2.0 technologies. Web 2.0 is described as “a more socially connected Web in which people can contribute as much as they can consume”(Anderson, 2007, p. 4). Rowbotham (2008) noted that universities have begun using Web 2.0 applications to reach out to and engage today’s students. More specifically, Parker and Chao (2007) noted that wikis are particularly well suited for collaborative learning, as they encourage reflective thinking in a social environment. This project aimed to determine the efficacy of using a shared wiki to engage students in international collaborations, specifically related to new and emerging Web 2.0 technologies. We aimed to determine the impact of this approach on student motivation and confidence, as well as changes in their cultural and technological competencies.BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCEPATHWAYS TO GLOBAL EDUCATIONWe live in a world characterized by globalization, emerging new technologies, and a knowledge-based economy. Together, these characteristics impact every aspect of our society including education, communication channels, legal systems, and socio-cultural trends (Christensen, 1997, Finholt & Olson, 1997; Olson & Olson, 2000; Teasley & Wolinsky, 2001). Without a doubt, the success of our future graduates depends on their abilities to be both culturally and technologically competent as they work and interact with diverse, geographically dispersed people, using a variety of technology tools. As early as 1969, educators have suggested that pre-service teachers should engage in cross-cultural experiences to enrich and expand their understandings of “a culture different from the one in which they were born and raised” (Taylor, p. ix). More recently, Causey, Thomas, and Armento (2000) recommended “extensive field experiences in diverse settings” to enhance greater cultural awareness (p. 43). Similarly, a number of professional organizations (e.g., Association of State Colleges and Universities, 2008; National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, 2008) have stressed the importance of producing globally competent teachers (Maleski & Phillion, 2009).PATHWAYS TO INFORMATION LITERACYAs noted earlier, to be productive citizens in a global, knowledge-driven society, students must be both culturally and information literate (Herman, 2000). Individuals who are information literate know how to analyze data from a variety of formats, and then synthesize it into something manageable and useful. They also are capable of using technology to create and communicate new ideas – skills employers are demanding of the 21st century workforce (Eisenberg, Lowe, & Spitzer, 2004).Current research indicates that students are entering higher education lacking basic ICT skills and, because these skills are not being taught or reinforced in the classroom, they are also entering the workforce with a deficit of critical ICT abilities (Breivik, 1998, 2005). The Educational Testing Service (ETS, 2008) noted: “Today’s students are part of a technology-savvy generation, but they are often still at a loss when it comes to using their critical thinking and problem-solving skills in a digital environment; a skill set identified as Information and Communication Technology Literacy” (online). CONTEXT OF STUDYThis project was conducted at a large public Midwestern university consisting of approximately 30,000 undergraduate students with 1,000 declared as education majors. EDCI 270 (Introduction to Educational Technology and Computing) is a large required lecture course that helps pre-service teachers from six colleges learn to 1) use technology to develop instructional materials and 2) integrate technology tools within their future classrooms. For this project, students in the class (244 students; 67% female, primarily freshmen and sophomores) were divided into small teams (32 teams). Each team used an emerging Web 2.0 technology (social software) to collaboratively create a repository (interactive wiki book) of Web 2.0 technologies. Each team developed a wiki chapter about a specific Web 2.0 application that included information about the application itself, how it is used, and how it could be integrated within K-16 formal and informal educational environments (see http://wiki.itap.purdue.edu/display/INSITE/INSITE+Main). A major section of the EDCI 270 course is devoted to distance education, including the use of video conferencing and online discussions, to meet the needs of individuals who are outside of the normal classroom setting. These individuals are brought “into” the course via video conferencing and/or asynchronous electronic discussions. International Partners (IPs) were incorporated as team members who worked collaboratively with approximately half the teams to design and develop instructional materials and demonstrations for the various Web 2.0 applications. In this way, EDCI 270 students learned about the Web 2.0 applications, practiced using them, and perhaps even more importantly, learned to work collectively with other individuals in and outside the class, including those from universities around the world. Individuals then evaluated the experience and reflected upon what they gained through the collaboration. Local educators and stake holders were invited to an end-of-semester showcase to highlight the projects and the end products created by the teams.INITIAL FINDINGSBased on students’ final course reflections, there was a positive indication that they had achieved specific ICT literacy goals. 51% of students commented that they met the NETS/ISTE standard to design and develop digital-age learning experiences and assessments. 39% of students believed that they could now facilitate and inspire students learning and creativity. Our initial findings showed that this method was quite enlightening for the students in meeting these goals:“This updated technology can be so easily incorporated into the classroom, which I was highly unaware of before I began the project.” - Teacher Tube team memberIn addition to the interactivity of peers within the course, many students had the opportunity to work with students from either Korea or Turkey. Many students in the pilot study found this to be motivating. 37% of students who did not have international partners and 59% of students who did have international partners believed they have a greater realization of an international perspective. They found that the differences in educational experiences were not as different as they had originally thought:“It helped out a lot and it kind of opened our eyes to make us see that people half way across the world are in the same boat that we are, doing, doing the same things.”- Google Docs team member, worked with Turkish students THANK YOUThis project would not be nearly as successful if it weren’t for our partners within the university; Director and Staff of the Instructional Media and Emerging Technologies unit of Information Technologies at Purdue Nor our international partners;Glen Coulthard, Professor, Faculty of Business, Okanagan Collegem British Columbia, CanadaM. Yasar Ozden, Professor and Department Head, Computer Education and Instructional Technologies, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, TurkeySung Hee Park, Instructor, Ewah Woman’s University, Seoul, KoreaFundingLess than $100,000ReferencesAnderson, P. (2007). What is Web 2.0? Ideas, Technologies and Implications for Education. JISC Technology and Standards Watch Retrieved January 30, 2009, fromhttp://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/techwatch/tsw0701b.pdfAssociation of State Colleges and Universities (2008). Public policy agenda. Washington, D.C.: AASCU. Retrieved January 13, 2009, from http://www.aascu.org/media/pdf/08_ppa.pdfBreivik, P. S. (1998). Student learning in the information age. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press. Breivik, P. S. (2005). 21st century learning and information literacy. Change, 37(2), 20-28.Causey, V. E., Thomas, C. D., & Armento, B. J. (2000). Cultural diversity is basically a foreign term to me: The challenges of diversity for preservice teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 33-45.Christensen, C.M. (1997). The innovator's dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms tofail. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Educational Testing Service (2008). iSkills overview. Retrieved January 10, 2009, from www.ets.org/iskills/Eisenberg, M. B., Lowe, C. A., & Spitzer, K.L. (2004). Information literacy: Essential skills for the Information Age (2nd ed.). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Finholt, T. A., & Olson, G. M. (1997) From laboratories to collaboratories: A new organizational form for scientific collaboration. Psychological Science 8(1), 28–35.Herman, A. M. (2000, April 11). A skills shortage, not a worker shortage. Remarks at the National Skills Summit. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor. Retrieved November 25, 2005, from http://www.dol.gov/_sec/skills_summit/p1s1.htmNational Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (2008). NCATE professional standards for the accreditation of teacher preparation institutions.Washington, D.C.: NCATE. Retrieved January 13, 2009, from http://www.ncate.org/documents/standards/NCATE%20Standards%202008.pdfMaleski, E., & Phillion, J. (2009). International field experiences: The impact of class, gender, and race on the perceptions and experiences of preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 52-60.Olson, G. M., & Olson, J. S. (2000). Distance matters. Human-Computer Interaction, 15, 139-179.Parker, K. R., & Chao, J. T. (2007). Wiki as a teaching tool. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3, 57-72.Rowbotham, J. (August 20, 2008). Learning Web 2.0, or Gen-Y Speak. The Australian Higher Education. Retrieved January 3, 2009, from http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,24208226-12332,00.htmlTaylor, H. (1969). The world as teacher. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Teasley, S., & Wolinsky, S. (2001). Scientific collaborations at a distance. Science, 292, 2254-2255.Zurkowski, P. G. (1974). The information service environment relationships and priorities. Washington, D. C.: National Commission on Librarians and Information Science.
In an attempt to increase students’ information and communication technology (ICT) skills, as well as promote collaboration across cultures, a collaborative wiki development project was implemented. As part of an introductory technology course, students (n=244) worked collaboratively with their classmates as well as with individuals from various countries to create a shared wikibook that explored Web 2.0 technologies. We report on the efficacy of using this approach to engage students in international collaborations, including the impact on students’ motivation and confidence, as well as changes in their perceptions of cultural and technological competency.
Abstract: (Click here to view other format again)
PROJECT SUMMARYA Web 2.0 project was created to promote information and communication technologies (ICT) literacy as well as student collaboration within a globalized era. Students worked collaboratively with peers within the course as well as with individuals from various countries to explore Web 2.0 technologies. Web 2.0 is described as “a more socially connected Web in which people can contribute as much as they can consume”(Anderson, 2007, p. 4). Rowbotham (2008) noted that universities have begun using Web 2.0 applications to reach out to and engage today’s students. More specifically, Parker and Chao (2007) noted that wikis are particularly well suited for collaborative learning, as they encourage reflective thinking in a social environment. This project aimed to determine the efficacy of using a shared wiki to engage students in international collaborations, specifically related to new and emerging Web 2.0 technologies. We aimed to determine the impact of this approach on student motivation and confidence, as well as changes in their cultural and technological competencies.BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCEPATHWAYS TO GLOBAL EDUCATIONWe live in a world characterized by globalization, emerging new technologies, and a knowledge-based economy. Together, these characteristics impact every aspect of our society including education, communication channels, legal systems, and socio-cultural trends (Christensen, 1997, Finholt & Olson, 1997; Olson & Olson, 2000; Teasley & Wolinsky, 2001). Without a doubt, the success of our future graduates depends on their abilities to be both culturally and technologically competent as they work and interact with diverse, geographically dispersed people, using a variety of technology tools. As early as 1969, educators have suggested that pre-service teachers should engage in cross-cultural experiences to enrich and expand their understandings of “a culture different from the one in which they were born and raised” (Taylor, p. ix). More recently, Causey, Thomas, and Armento (2000) recommended “extensive field experiences in diverse settings” to enhance greater cultural awareness (p. 43). Similarly, a number of professional organizations (e.g., Association of State Colleges and Universities, 2008; National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, 2008) have stressed the importance of producing globally competent teachers (Maleski & Phillion, 2009).PATHWAYS TO INFORMATION LITERACYAs noted earlier, to be productive citizens in a global, knowledge-driven society, students must be both culturally and information literate (Herman, 2000). Individuals who are information literate know how to analyze data from a variety of formats, and then synthesize it into something manageable and useful. They also are capable of using technology to create and communicate new ideas – skills employers are demanding of the 21st century workforce (Eisenberg, Lowe, & Spitzer, 2004).Current research indicates that students are entering higher education lacking basic ICT skills and, because these skills are not being taught or reinforced in the classroom, they are also entering the workforce with a deficit of critical ICT abilities (Breivik, 1998, 2005). The Educational Testing Service (ETS, 2008) noted: “Today’s students are part of a technology-savvy generation, but they are often still at a loss when it comes to using their critical thinking and problem-solving skills in a digital environment; a skill set identified as Information and Communication Technology Literacy” (online). CONTEXT OF STUDYThis project was conducted at a large public Midwestern university consisting of approximately 30,000 undergraduate students with 1,000 declared as education majors. EDCI 270 (Introduction to Educational Technology and Computing) is a large required lecture course that helps pre-service teachers from six colleges learn to 1) use technology to develop instructional materials and 2) integrate technology tools within their future classrooms. For this project, students in the class (244 students; 67% female, primarily freshmen and sophomores) were divided into small teams (32 teams). Each team used an emerging Web 2.0 technology (social software) to collaboratively create a repository (interactive wiki book) of Web 2.0 technologies. Each team developed a wiki chapter about a specific Web 2.0 application that included information about the application itself, how it is used, and how it could be integrated within K-16 formal and informal educational environments (see http://wiki.itap.purdue.edu/display/INSITE/INSITE+Main). A major section of the EDCI 270 course is devoted to distance education, including the use of video conferencing and online discussions, to meet the needs of individuals who are outside of the normal classroom setting. These individuals are brought “into” the course via video conferencing and/or asynchronous electronic discussions. International Partners (IPs) were incorporated as team members who worked collaboratively with approximately half the teams to design and develop instructional materials and demonstrations for the various Web 2.0 applications. In this way, EDCI 270 students learned about the Web 2.0 applications, practiced using them, and perhaps even more importantly, learned to work collectively with other individuals in and outside the class, including those from universities around the world. Individuals then evaluated the experience and reflected upon what they gained through the collaboration. Local educators and stake holders were invited to an end-of-semester showcase to highlight the projects and the end products created by the teams.INITIAL FINDINGSBased on students’ final course reflections, there was a positive indication that they had achieved specific ICT literacy goals. 51% of students commented that they met the NETS/ISTE standard to design and develop digital-age learning experiences and assessments. 39% of students believed that they could now facilitate and inspire students learning and creativity. Our initial findings showed that this method was quite enlightening for the students in meeting these goals:“This updated technology can be so easily incorporated into the classroom, which I was highly unaware of before I began the project.” - Teacher Tube team memberIn addition to the interactivity of peers within the course, many students had the opportunity to work with students from either Korea or Turkey. Many students in the pilot study found this to be motivating. 37% of students who did not have international partners and 59% of students who did have international partners believed they have a greater realization of an international perspective. They found that the differences in educational experiences were not as different as they had originally thought:“It helped out a lot and it kind of opened our eyes to make us see that people half way across the world are in the same boat that we are, doing, doing the same things.”- Google Docs team member, worked with Turkish students THANK YOUThis project would not be nearly as successful if it weren’t for our partners within the university; Director and Staff of the Instructional Media and Emerging Technologies unit of Information Technologies at Purdue Nor our international partners;Glen Coulthard, Professor, Faculty of Business, Okanagan Collegem British Columbia, CanadaM. Yasar Ozden, Professor and Department Head, Computer Education and Instructional Technologies, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, TurkeySung Hee Park, Instructor, Ewah Woman’s University, Seoul, KoreaFundingLess than $100,000ReferencesAnderson, P. (2007). What is Web 2.0? Ideas, Technologies and Implications for Education. JISC Technology and Standards Watch Retrieved January 30, 2009, fromhttp://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/techwatch/tsw0701b.pdfAssociation of State Colleges and Universities (2008). Public policy agenda. Washington, D.C.: AASCU. Retrieved January 13, 2009, from http://www.aascu.org/media/pdf/08_ppa.pdfBreivik, P. S. (1998). Student learning in the information age. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press. Breivik, P. S. (2005). 21st century learning and information literacy. Change, 37(2), 20-28.Causey, V. E., Thomas, C. D., & Armento, B. J. (2000). Cultural diversity is basically a foreign term to me: The challenges of diversity for preservice teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 33-45.Christensen, C.M. (1997). The innovator's dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms tofail. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Educational Testing Service (2008). iSkills overview. Retrieved January 10, 2009, from www.ets.org/iskills/Eisenberg, M. B., Lowe, C. A., & Spitzer, K.L. (2004). Information literacy: Essential skills for the Information Age (2nd ed.). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Finholt, T. A., & Olson, G. M. (1997) From laboratories to collaboratories: A new organizational form for scientific collaboration. Psychological Science 8(1), 28–35.Herman, A. M. (2000, April 11). A skills shortage, not a worker shortage. Remarks at the National Skills Summit. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor. Retrieved November 25, 2005, from http://www.dol.gov/_sec/skills_summit/p1s1.htmNational Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (2008). NCATE professional standards for the accreditation of teacher preparation institutions.Washington, D.C.: NCATE. Retrieved January 13, 2009, from http://www.ncate.org/documents/standards/NCATE%20Standards%202008.pdfMaleski, E., & Phillion, J. (2009). International field experiences: The impact of class, gender, and race on the perceptions and experiences of preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 52-60.Olson, G. M., & Olson, J. S. (2000). Distance matters. Human-Computer Interaction, 15, 139-179.Parker, K. R., & Chao, J. T. (2007). Wiki as a teaching tool. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3, 57-72.Rowbotham, J. (August 20, 2008). Learning Web 2.0, or Gen-Y Speak. The Australian Higher Education. Retrieved January 3, 2009, from http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,24208226-12332,00.htmlTaylor, H. (1969). The world as teacher. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Teasley, S., & Wolinsky, S. (2001). Scientific collaborations at a distance. Science, 292, 2254-2255.Zurkowski, P. G. (1974). The information service environment relationships and priorities. Washington, D. C.: National Commission on Librarians and Information Science.
teacher for 21 century
Invisible Differences: Educating Teachers for 21st Century Contexts
This paper details a multimedia assignment designed to address the problem of preparing apparently homogeneous cohorts of pre-service teachers to teach in highly diverse schools. Drawing from more than 300 pre-service teachers’ digital family history projects, I discuss the power of multimedia to extend dialogic interaction on human diversity. In the presentation, I offer a theoretical foundation using this pedagogical approach to move teacher education students to personalize issues of diversity by examining their own differences.
Abstract: (Click here to view other format again)
Invisible Differences: Educating Teachers for 21st Century ContextsInvisible Differences is an online archive of pre-service teachers’ family history projects, initially designed by graduate students in an advanced instructional design course (http://www.uky.edu/~casenet/InvisibleDifferences/index.html). As a diversity signature assignment for elementary social studies, the family history project requires a class presentation delivered in a digital medium as a multimedia story and a final reflective paper on the ways such an assignment can be adapted for elementary students. The assignment is inquiry-based, requiring students to gather, analyze, and interpret data from various sources. Students combine information from interviews, family artifacts and photographs with historical texts, archives, hyperlinks to Internet sites, geographic tools, and other resources. It involves hearing and interpreting family stories, exploring historical resources and perspectives, selecting artifacts and original documents, and employing a variety of multimedia technologies to compose digital family histories. Gathering family history information, analyzing and interpreting it in a cohesive multimedia story enacts self-narrative in interactive ways that situate historical research in familiar contexts.Personalizing DifferenceKnowing who you are and where you come from is one of the most important pieces of information that one can have. This project opened my eyes to a lot of differences that existed among my classmates. As similar as we look on the outside, I have found that we are actually a very diverse group… who all have unique histories. Establishing a concept of diversity and understanding that we are all immigrants [is the] purpose of this family history project. For analysis of the Invisible Differences Project and interpretation of learning outcomes, I rely on narrative inquiry, broadly defined as the examination of stories lived and told (Clandinin & Connelly, 1996). A tension that often exists in these social studies methods courses revolves around students’ limited exposure to cultural diversity, the extent to which they have assimilated to the culture of the university, and the need to prepare them for effectively teaching children from a wide range of cultures and socioeconomic conditions. Many are reluctant to discuss human differences and voice frustration in course evaluations with what they say is undue emphasis on issues of diversity. However, without materializing what they understand about diversity or how they view different others, it is difficult to assure these teacher education students are adequately prepared for the diversity that now exists in the public schools. The family history assignment provides an opportunity to examine and discuss human differences in a manner that both personalizes and politicizes issues of privilege and power. While the process of collecting information, analyzing and interpreting it, and composing a multimedia presentation are important learning activities in this assignment, making it public in presentation sessions is the most essential activity for reconstructing schemas on human differences. Both presenting and being audience for the family history presentations are key learning activities for the dialogic interaction that changes the way students think and talk about human differences. As one student said, “This project opened my eyes to a lot of differences that existed among my classmates. As similar as we look on the outside, I have found that we are actually a very diverse group of young women who all have unique histories.” Intersections for Situated DiscourseImagine a class of 30 pre-service teachers presenting multimedia family histories one after the other over four or five class sessions. One begins with a photograph of the last slave in her family. She shows a map of Mississippi delineating segregated communities and talks about the abandoned school where freed slaves built their own community. She tells a family story about how difficult it was to leave the plantation and that many slaves chose to remain rather than endure the abject poverty of free Blacks living in the old school building. Another student begins her family history with a photograph of her parents, her mother who is White and her father who is Black. She tells a story about recently meeting her White grandparents for the first time and how little she knew of them because they had disowned her mother for marrying a Black man. Several classes later, another student presents her family history by showing the plantation in Mississippi, once owned and operated by her ancestors and now a tourist attraction. Connections are made between descendents of slaves and slave owners and the history of slavery in the United States becomes personally relevant in ways it had not for the students who are privileged by being White. Questions are asked and conversations on race unfold in deeply personal ways that otherwise might have been more polite than authentic. As one student said, “This project was possibly one of the most interesting projects I have completed in my college career.” Proposed PresentationIn this session, I present a digital collage of selected family stories and discuss some ways multimedia extends and enhances the aesthetic power of narrative. I also provide an analysis of the dialectical struggle between student, historical artifacts, and medium in the ongoing process of constructing identity as teachers. I conclude by discussing findings from the investigation of students’ multimedia family history projects in relation to gains in awareness, appreciation, and understanding of human diversity, as well as indicators of increased potential for effectively teaching widely diverse public school students. ReferencesClandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1996). Teachers’ professional knowledge landscapes: Teacher stories—Stories of schools. Educational Researcher, 25(3), 24-30.
This paper details a multimedia assignment designed to address the problem of preparing apparently homogeneous cohorts of pre-service teachers to teach in highly diverse schools. Drawing from more than 300 pre-service teachers’ digital family history projects, I discuss the power of multimedia to extend dialogic interaction on human diversity. In the presentation, I offer a theoretical foundation using this pedagogical approach to move teacher education students to personalize issues of diversity by examining their own differences.
Abstract: (Click here to view other format again)
Invisible Differences: Educating Teachers for 21st Century ContextsInvisible Differences is an online archive of pre-service teachers’ family history projects, initially designed by graduate students in an advanced instructional design course (http://www.uky.edu/~casenet/InvisibleDifferences/index.html). As a diversity signature assignment for elementary social studies, the family history project requires a class presentation delivered in a digital medium as a multimedia story and a final reflective paper on the ways such an assignment can be adapted for elementary students. The assignment is inquiry-based, requiring students to gather, analyze, and interpret data from various sources. Students combine information from interviews, family artifacts and photographs with historical texts, archives, hyperlinks to Internet sites, geographic tools, and other resources. It involves hearing and interpreting family stories, exploring historical resources and perspectives, selecting artifacts and original documents, and employing a variety of multimedia technologies to compose digital family histories. Gathering family history information, analyzing and interpreting it in a cohesive multimedia story enacts self-narrative in interactive ways that situate historical research in familiar contexts.Personalizing DifferenceKnowing who you are and where you come from is one of the most important pieces of information that one can have. This project opened my eyes to a lot of differences that existed among my classmates. As similar as we look on the outside, I have found that we are actually a very diverse group… who all have unique histories. Establishing a concept of diversity and understanding that we are all immigrants [is the] purpose of this family history project. For analysis of the Invisible Differences Project and interpretation of learning outcomes, I rely on narrative inquiry, broadly defined as the examination of stories lived and told (Clandinin & Connelly, 1996). A tension that often exists in these social studies methods courses revolves around students’ limited exposure to cultural diversity, the extent to which they have assimilated to the culture of the university, and the need to prepare them for effectively teaching children from a wide range of cultures and socioeconomic conditions. Many are reluctant to discuss human differences and voice frustration in course evaluations with what they say is undue emphasis on issues of diversity. However, without materializing what they understand about diversity or how they view different others, it is difficult to assure these teacher education students are adequately prepared for the diversity that now exists in the public schools. The family history assignment provides an opportunity to examine and discuss human differences in a manner that both personalizes and politicizes issues of privilege and power. While the process of collecting information, analyzing and interpreting it, and composing a multimedia presentation are important learning activities in this assignment, making it public in presentation sessions is the most essential activity for reconstructing schemas on human differences. Both presenting and being audience for the family history presentations are key learning activities for the dialogic interaction that changes the way students think and talk about human differences. As one student said, “This project opened my eyes to a lot of differences that existed among my classmates. As similar as we look on the outside, I have found that we are actually a very diverse group of young women who all have unique histories.” Intersections for Situated DiscourseImagine a class of 30 pre-service teachers presenting multimedia family histories one after the other over four or five class sessions. One begins with a photograph of the last slave in her family. She shows a map of Mississippi delineating segregated communities and talks about the abandoned school where freed slaves built their own community. She tells a family story about how difficult it was to leave the plantation and that many slaves chose to remain rather than endure the abject poverty of free Blacks living in the old school building. Another student begins her family history with a photograph of her parents, her mother who is White and her father who is Black. She tells a story about recently meeting her White grandparents for the first time and how little she knew of them because they had disowned her mother for marrying a Black man. Several classes later, another student presents her family history by showing the plantation in Mississippi, once owned and operated by her ancestors and now a tourist attraction. Connections are made between descendents of slaves and slave owners and the history of slavery in the United States becomes personally relevant in ways it had not for the students who are privileged by being White. Questions are asked and conversations on race unfold in deeply personal ways that otherwise might have been more polite than authentic. As one student said, “This project was possibly one of the most interesting projects I have completed in my college career.” Proposed PresentationIn this session, I present a digital collage of selected family stories and discuss some ways multimedia extends and enhances the aesthetic power of narrative. I also provide an analysis of the dialectical struggle between student, historical artifacts, and medium in the ongoing process of constructing identity as teachers. I conclude by discussing findings from the investigation of students’ multimedia family history projects in relation to gains in awareness, appreciation, and understanding of human diversity, as well as indicators of increased potential for effectively teaching widely diverse public school students. ReferencesClandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1996). Teachers’ professional knowledge landscapes: Teacher stories—Stories of schools. Educational Researcher, 25(3), 24-30.
engagement
This Thing Called Engagement
Like love, the subject of Cole Porter’s famous song, any whole-hearted attempt to understand learning engagement will accept a degree of mystery, its sometimes fleeting nature, and its needs for continual reinforcement, negotiation, frequent forgiveness, mutual responsibility, and constant imagination and faith. This presentation explores useful, prevailing conceptions of learning engagement and its related qualities, but expands the concept further to include the situational qualities that meet individual qualities in bringing about engagement experiences.
Abstract:
Instructional designers (IDs) face numerous formidable tasks, including working within content areas for which they typically lack expertise, understanding often obscured learner and organizational needs, defining performance and knowledge-oriented objectives will address those needs, determining which learning and instructional theories they should use as guidance for the given instructional situation. Add to these the competing needs, goals, and constraints presented by stakeholders and learners and the situation becomes even more complex. But if IDs are willing to stare even deeper into the lion’s mouth of their practice they will face the terrifying and wonderful challenge of stimulating learning engagement. This presentation will explore what is meant by engagement and offer general conclusions about achieving engagement with instructional designs.Engagement is often identified as a critical component of learning. Active engagement, as opposed to mere attention or mechanically going through the motions of instruction, is considered prerequisite to deep learning (Bransford, Brown, Cocking, Donovan, & Pellegrino, 2000). Beyond task persistence, which can merely indicate coercion or an expectation of extrinsic reward, true engagement might be indicated when learners exhibit a developing curiosity, anticipate questions and content gaps that need filling, genuinely attempt to work out instructional problems and ponder content until understanding is achieved, generate new ideas and questions about the content, and struggle for learning coherence. No deep learning will take place until a learner both submits to what the instructional situation has to offer and also genuinely confronts it to test new ideas or try out new skills. In fact, a developing engagement can be seen not only as the best indicator of the potential for deep learning, but as the medium in which learning takes place (Dewey, 1938/1997). Engagement means more than merely the addition of interactivity to otherwise static presentation of content. Educators have recognized engagement as a complex process composed of individual cognitive, affective, and metacognitive processes (Chen & McGrath, 2003; Yang, 2002), as well as socio-cultural processes within learning environments (Case, 2008; Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1998; Kuh, 2001). In the context of single learning experiences, cognitive and metacognitive engagement are the dimensions perhaps most frequently referenced (Bangert-Drowns & Pyke, 2002; Corno & Mandinach, 1983). From this perspective, engagement comes about when the learner brings to bear individual goals and intentions while personalizing the learning experience to achieve valued ends. In other words, cognitive engagement requires an active contribution the learner makes to the learning experience, and not merely passive reception of information. Engagement is sometimes conflated with interest, perhaps with interest seen as the psychological state behind engagement behaviors (Hidi & Renninger, 2006). Like Dewey (e.g., 1934/1989), Reed et al. (2002) see engagement as an “activity-related process” that subsumes the psychological states of involvement and interest. At times, engagement reaches levels in which experience is infused with meaning beyond what can be pointed to as utilitarian, where connection to the situation is immediate and immersive, and in which people might describe themselves as feeling “fully alive” (Berleant, 1991). This kind of engagement is most closely associated with intrinsic motivation and strong situational interest (Schraw & Lehman, 2001). While exploring and embracing these aspects of engagement, this presentation expands the concept further to include the situational qualities that meet individual qualities in bringing about engagement experiences. It offers a conception that views engagement as an ongoing transaction between learner and instruction rather than as a one-way commitment. This concept suggests that instructional providers should concern themselves equally with the qualities of the learning environment that stimulate cognitive and affective processes—qualities that create opportunities for interaction, commitment, and contribution; that allow room for learners to own the experience rather than merely participate; that attempt to find deep connections to learner’s experiences outside the learning environment; and that strive to create not just effective, but also compelling and meaningful learning experiences. In concluding the presentation, a model of situational and individual qualities of learning experiences with the potential for deep engagement is offered (Parrish & Wilson, 2009). Situational qualities discussed include immediacy, malleability, compellingness, resonance, and coherence. Individual qualities include intent, presence, openness, and trust. Within a learning experience, these qualities meet and reinforce one another to influence the level of engagement.Taking responsibility for learning engagement can be a terrifying prospect because it means having to attend to the experience of learning, not just learning outcomes as they are often narrowly defined in educational assessments. The complex, systemic nature of experience means that designers are never fully in control of experiential outcomes. On the other hand, they can’t just abdicate control and continue working in good faith. Taking responsibility for learning engagement is also a wonderful prospect for instructional designers. It can open their eyes to new ways of viewing their practice—using technology to invite imagination and engagement and to instill wonder rather than merely delivering content (Egan, 2007; Wilson & Al Tenaiji, 2008). With a focus on engagement, IDs are encouraged to exercise creativity and look more broadly for guiding sources for their practice, as well as to broaden their concerns for learning outcomes. Like the subject of the famous song by Cole Porter in which he asks, “What is this thing called love?...Just who can solve its mystery?,” any whole-hearted attempt to understand learning engagement needs to accept a degree of mystery, its sometimes fleeting nature, and its needs for continual reinforcement, negotiation, frequent forgiveness, mutual responsibility, and constant imagination and faith.
Like love, the subject of Cole Porter’s famous song, any whole-hearted attempt to understand learning engagement will accept a degree of mystery, its sometimes fleeting nature, and its needs for continual reinforcement, negotiation, frequent forgiveness, mutual responsibility, and constant imagination and faith. This presentation explores useful, prevailing conceptions of learning engagement and its related qualities, but expands the concept further to include the situational qualities that meet individual qualities in bringing about engagement experiences.
Abstract:
Instructional designers (IDs) face numerous formidable tasks, including working within content areas for which they typically lack expertise, understanding often obscured learner and organizational needs, defining performance and knowledge-oriented objectives will address those needs, determining which learning and instructional theories they should use as guidance for the given instructional situation. Add to these the competing needs, goals, and constraints presented by stakeholders and learners and the situation becomes even more complex. But if IDs are willing to stare even deeper into the lion’s mouth of their practice they will face the terrifying and wonderful challenge of stimulating learning engagement. This presentation will explore what is meant by engagement and offer general conclusions about achieving engagement with instructional designs.Engagement is often identified as a critical component of learning. Active engagement, as opposed to mere attention or mechanically going through the motions of instruction, is considered prerequisite to deep learning (Bransford, Brown, Cocking, Donovan, & Pellegrino, 2000). Beyond task persistence, which can merely indicate coercion or an expectation of extrinsic reward, true engagement might be indicated when learners exhibit a developing curiosity, anticipate questions and content gaps that need filling, genuinely attempt to work out instructional problems and ponder content until understanding is achieved, generate new ideas and questions about the content, and struggle for learning coherence. No deep learning will take place until a learner both submits to what the instructional situation has to offer and also genuinely confronts it to test new ideas or try out new skills. In fact, a developing engagement can be seen not only as the best indicator of the potential for deep learning, but as the medium in which learning takes place (Dewey, 1938/1997). Engagement means more than merely the addition of interactivity to otherwise static presentation of content. Educators have recognized engagement as a complex process composed of individual cognitive, affective, and metacognitive processes (Chen & McGrath, 2003; Yang, 2002), as well as socio-cultural processes within learning environments (Case, 2008; Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1998; Kuh, 2001). In the context of single learning experiences, cognitive and metacognitive engagement are the dimensions perhaps most frequently referenced (Bangert-Drowns & Pyke, 2002; Corno & Mandinach, 1983). From this perspective, engagement comes about when the learner brings to bear individual goals and intentions while personalizing the learning experience to achieve valued ends. In other words, cognitive engagement requires an active contribution the learner makes to the learning experience, and not merely passive reception of information. Engagement is sometimes conflated with interest, perhaps with interest seen as the psychological state behind engagement behaviors (Hidi & Renninger, 2006). Like Dewey (e.g., 1934/1989), Reed et al. (2002) see engagement as an “activity-related process” that subsumes the psychological states of involvement and interest. At times, engagement reaches levels in which experience is infused with meaning beyond what can be pointed to as utilitarian, where connection to the situation is immediate and immersive, and in which people might describe themselves as feeling “fully alive” (Berleant, 1991). This kind of engagement is most closely associated with intrinsic motivation and strong situational interest (Schraw & Lehman, 2001). While exploring and embracing these aspects of engagement, this presentation expands the concept further to include the situational qualities that meet individual qualities in bringing about engagement experiences. It offers a conception that views engagement as an ongoing transaction between learner and instruction rather than as a one-way commitment. This concept suggests that instructional providers should concern themselves equally with the qualities of the learning environment that stimulate cognitive and affective processes—qualities that create opportunities for interaction, commitment, and contribution; that allow room for learners to own the experience rather than merely participate; that attempt to find deep connections to learner’s experiences outside the learning environment; and that strive to create not just effective, but also compelling and meaningful learning experiences. In concluding the presentation, a model of situational and individual qualities of learning experiences with the potential for deep engagement is offered (Parrish & Wilson, 2009). Situational qualities discussed include immediacy, malleability, compellingness, resonance, and coherence. Individual qualities include intent, presence, openness, and trust. Within a learning experience, these qualities meet and reinforce one another to influence the level of engagement.Taking responsibility for learning engagement can be a terrifying prospect because it means having to attend to the experience of learning, not just learning outcomes as they are often narrowly defined in educational assessments. The complex, systemic nature of experience means that designers are never fully in control of experiential outcomes. On the other hand, they can’t just abdicate control and continue working in good faith. Taking responsibility for learning engagement is also a wonderful prospect for instructional designers. It can open their eyes to new ways of viewing their practice—using technology to invite imagination and engagement and to instill wonder rather than merely delivering content (Egan, 2007; Wilson & Al Tenaiji, 2008). With a focus on engagement, IDs are encouraged to exercise creativity and look more broadly for guiding sources for their practice, as well as to broaden their concerns for learning outcomes. Like the subject of the famous song by Cole Porter in which he asks, “What is this thing called love?...Just who can solve its mystery?,” any whole-hearted attempt to understand learning engagement needs to accept a degree of mystery, its sometimes fleeting nature, and its needs for continual reinforcement, negotiation, frequent forgiveness, mutual responsibility, and constant imagination and faith.
wikis motivation
Increasing Learner Motivation through a Collaborative Online Experience: Working with Wikis
Today’s students have been brought up in collaborative online environment and are accustomed to a high level of interaction with material and people. The challenge for educators is to incorporate collaborative technology into the classroom without ignoring pedagogical principles. This session will discuss the relationship between online collaboration through a wiki and student engagement and motivation in a face-to-face environment and provide ideas and suggestions for using a wiki in the classroom.
Abstract: (Click here to enhance readability)
Collaborative web sites, or wikis, can be a powerful tool for increasing student engagement in the classroom. The objective of this presentation is to introduce attendees to the early stages of a study investigating the relationship between wikis and student engagement and motivation. This session will also to initiate a conversation about the possibilities of using wikis to enhance student engagement and motivation in a face to face classroom setting. In many college classrooms, instructors are challenged with finding innovative methods for motivating their students and getting them to connect to the course content. In most cases, the level of motivation may determine a learner’s involvement or engagement in learning activities. It is important to consider this when developing learning activities and lesson plans. Hofer (2006) has observed that there is a direct relationship between a learner’s level of motivation and his or her engagement in the learning process. If learners do not see value in the activity they are presented, they are less likely to engage in that activity. It is important for teachers, instructors, and curriculum developers to understand what motivates learners and how that can be incorporated into learning activities. When one looks at the many different theories of motivation, there are a several key elements that affect one’s drive for achievement. Research has shown that many motivators are connected to internal personal needs rather than external factors (Schunk, 2008). These internal factors can include a need for recognition, an internal drive to succeed or meet a set of personal needs (Malone & Lepper, 1987; Schunk, 2008; Hofer, 2006). In their research, Malone and Leper developed a taxonomy of intrinsic motivation for learning. One motivator that they identified was a learner’s sense of control over the experience (Malone & Lepper, 1987). Based on their research, a learner’s perception of control over an environment increases the learner’s level of interest. This is also shown in Rotter’s Locus of Control theory (Schunk, 2008). According to Rotter’s theory, learners are more likely to engage in activities and academic tasks if they believe they have control over their personal success or failure. Knowing this, it would makes sense that giving learners some control or even the perception of control over their learning environment would have a positive effect on their interest and motivation to engage in learning. Another aspect of control is the learner’s ability to make choices about their environment. Hofer (2006) identifies choice as an index of motivation. She explains that learners who are allowed to choose their learning tasks are more likely to perform well in those tasks and are motivated to succeed. Malone and Lepper also discuss choice as a factor in increasing motivation (Malone & Lepper, 1987). They state that not only can choice in task and goals can have an effect on instruction but even the illusion of choice can have a strong effect on interest (Langer as cited in Malone & Lepper, 1987). Giving the learners some control of course content and choice in learning activities not only increases learner motivation but is also one of the central ideas behind a learner-centered classroom versus as content-centered classroom (Halonen, 2006). Today’s students have been brought up in collaborative online environment and are accustomed to a high level of interaction with material and people. Research has shown that students are comfortable and even expect collaborative technology to be present in their classes (Caverly, 2001). It is necessary for educators to meet them where they already are in terms of using technology. The challenge for educators is to incorporate collaborative technology into the classroom without ignoring pedagogical principles. It is also important to remember that our purpose for using technology is based on pedagogy; hence, pedagogy should be the driving force behind developing learning activities (Stahl & Boylan, 2003). This session will discuss research designed to evaluate new web technology within this framework. The study to be discussed is an action research investigation which is an adaptation of a completed pilot study that investigated online interaction as a tool for increasing student engagement and motivation. The original study used a mixed-method approach to data collection. In order to answer the research questions, a student opinion survey was used. The opinion survey consisted of a two-part group-administered questionnaire. Part one contained fifteen items using a Likert-type format to assess the students' perceptions of the course and connection to the material. Part two included four open-ended questions designed to assess the students' opinion of the course and course material. The current study will use a similar approach with some modification to the tool. The session will review the research and provide information that can increase an educator's knowledge of how different collaborative web-based activities affect student motivation and engagement. An understanding of what activities draw deeper connections and improve motivation can be used when designing effective instructional practices and technology integration strategies.
Today’s students have been brought up in collaborative online environment and are accustomed to a high level of interaction with material and people. The challenge for educators is to incorporate collaborative technology into the classroom without ignoring pedagogical principles. This session will discuss the relationship between online collaboration through a wiki and student engagement and motivation in a face-to-face environment and provide ideas and suggestions for using a wiki in the classroom.
Abstract: (Click here to enhance readability)
Collaborative web sites, or wikis, can be a powerful tool for increasing student engagement in the classroom. The objective of this presentation is to introduce attendees to the early stages of a study investigating the relationship between wikis and student engagement and motivation. This session will also to initiate a conversation about the possibilities of using wikis to enhance student engagement and motivation in a face to face classroom setting. In many college classrooms, instructors are challenged with finding innovative methods for motivating their students and getting them to connect to the course content. In most cases, the level of motivation may determine a learner’s involvement or engagement in learning activities. It is important to consider this when developing learning activities and lesson plans. Hofer (2006) has observed that there is a direct relationship between a learner’s level of motivation and his or her engagement in the learning process. If learners do not see value in the activity they are presented, they are less likely to engage in that activity. It is important for teachers, instructors, and curriculum developers to understand what motivates learners and how that can be incorporated into learning activities. When one looks at the many different theories of motivation, there are a several key elements that affect one’s drive for achievement. Research has shown that many motivators are connected to internal personal needs rather than external factors (Schunk, 2008). These internal factors can include a need for recognition, an internal drive to succeed or meet a set of personal needs (Malone & Lepper, 1987; Schunk, 2008; Hofer, 2006). In their research, Malone and Leper developed a taxonomy of intrinsic motivation for learning. One motivator that they identified was a learner’s sense of control over the experience (Malone & Lepper, 1987). Based on their research, a learner’s perception of control over an environment increases the learner’s level of interest. This is also shown in Rotter’s Locus of Control theory (Schunk, 2008). According to Rotter’s theory, learners are more likely to engage in activities and academic tasks if they believe they have control over their personal success or failure. Knowing this, it would makes sense that giving learners some control or even the perception of control over their learning environment would have a positive effect on their interest and motivation to engage in learning. Another aspect of control is the learner’s ability to make choices about their environment. Hofer (2006) identifies choice as an index of motivation. She explains that learners who are allowed to choose their learning tasks are more likely to perform well in those tasks and are motivated to succeed. Malone and Lepper also discuss choice as a factor in increasing motivation (Malone & Lepper, 1987). They state that not only can choice in task and goals can have an effect on instruction but even the illusion of choice can have a strong effect on interest (Langer as cited in Malone & Lepper, 1987). Giving the learners some control of course content and choice in learning activities not only increases learner motivation but is also one of the central ideas behind a learner-centered classroom versus as content-centered classroom (Halonen, 2006). Today’s students have been brought up in collaborative online environment and are accustomed to a high level of interaction with material and people. Research has shown that students are comfortable and even expect collaborative technology to be present in their classes (Caverly, 2001). It is necessary for educators to meet them where they already are in terms of using technology. The challenge for educators is to incorporate collaborative technology into the classroom without ignoring pedagogical principles. It is also important to remember that our purpose for using technology is based on pedagogy; hence, pedagogy should be the driving force behind developing learning activities (Stahl & Boylan, 2003). This session will discuss research designed to evaluate new web technology within this framework. The study to be discussed is an action research investigation which is an adaptation of a completed pilot study that investigated online interaction as a tool for increasing student engagement and motivation. The original study used a mixed-method approach to data collection. In order to answer the research questions, a student opinion survey was used. The opinion survey consisted of a two-part group-administered questionnaire. Part one contained fifteen items using a Likert-type format to assess the students' perceptions of the course and connection to the material. Part two included four open-ended questions designed to assess the students' opinion of the course and course material. The current study will use a similar approach with some modification to the tool. The session will review the research and provide information that can increase an educator's knowledge of how different collaborative web-based activities affect student motivation and engagement. An understanding of what activities draw deeper connections and improve motivation can be used when designing effective instructional practices and technology integration strategies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)