I have had the unique opportunity to observe two courses for this FIT assignment. First, the 7150 course – this course is set up very differently from the second course (6140). It is great to see that there isn’t one right answer, one formula for a successful online course. Of course, that makes designing and facilitating a course that much harder, there isn’t a specific road map to follow; which is, essentially the purpose of us taking place in these courses. By observing many courses and discussing pros and cons, as well as different strategies we become equipped to take the best of all for our courses. In 7150 I observed reflections in the discussion board and collaborative group projects. It was also interesting to see voice annotated power point presentations by the students. This is definitely a skill I plan to teach and employ in my courses (or some variation). Because of the group work, it was decided that this course may not fit our FIT needs so I was then transferred to 6140 to continue to observe and take place in their course. This course was set up very differently. Lots of multimedia pieces, web resources, and blogging were integral parts of this course. Of course, different content necessitates different strategies and tools. There is a video introduction of the professor. I think this is a great idea – it allows the students to actually put a face to the instructor since this course meets exclusively online. I have been asked to pre-grade/critique assignments, as well as respond to blogs the students have created. It has been interesting to have “conversations” on their readings. I think blogs are a great way to do this. Blogging seems more conversational and closest to an in-class discussion. The instructor is very present and sends plenty of email to clarify issues, answer questions, and nudge students.
All in all I think this opportunity will allow me to learn and employ many differing strategies for my own course.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Saturday, October 13, 2007
My Face to Face Special Topic
Thursday in class I presented my topic on Asynchronous and Synchronous learning. If I had to do the presentation over, I would have omitted the card game or at least seriously revamped it. I wanted to get the point across that our students (and ourselves) come in with different abilities, different expectations, different everything and we are tasked with communicating and resolving those differences by using different (have I used that word enough) strategies as a facilitator. However, I think I could have accomplished that in a (wait for it….) different way. (I love being a smart ass :) ).
I liked demonstrating LTU’s synch tool – Horizon Wimba. I also like teaching with it. However, other online classrooms/educational experiences can be facilitated with other tools or strategies. I didn’t have lots of time but would have liked to show live chat --both typed and verbal (which are valuable parts of Wimba). Asynchronously, using discussion boards (which I have some great and not so great examples of – it is sometimes great to learn from things which have worked, but I think more valuable to learn from things that didn’t work!!). I am also looking forward to using some Asynch tools like the annotated PowerPoint presentations I have seen in the courses I am observing. Using the video clips, audio clips and of course online resources are also great ways to convey information. As for the communication part I really like the idea of figuring out your problem then the technology tool to fix it – a very IT way of looking at development, but not the standard way we usually do it.
I would have liked to spend more time talking about and debating the pros and cons of the different types of communication (Asynch vs. synch). Overall, I think it went well and would happily answer any additional questions anyone has.
I liked demonstrating LTU’s synch tool – Horizon Wimba. I also like teaching with it. However, other online classrooms/educational experiences can be facilitated with other tools or strategies. I didn’t have lots of time but would have liked to show live chat --both typed and verbal (which are valuable parts of Wimba). Asynchronously, using discussion boards (which I have some great and not so great examples of – it is sometimes great to learn from things which have worked, but I think more valuable to learn from things that didn’t work!!). I am also looking forward to using some Asynch tools like the annotated PowerPoint presentations I have seen in the courses I am observing. Using the video clips, audio clips and of course online resources are also great ways to convey information. As for the communication part I really like the idea of figuring out your problem then the technology tool to fix it – a very IT way of looking at development, but not the standard way we usually do it.
I would have liked to spend more time talking about and debating the pros and cons of the different types of communication (Asynch vs. synch). Overall, I think it went well and would happily answer any additional questions anyone has.
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Unintended Directions
I don’t believe the discussion of collaborative, cooperative, and competitive learning was a topic that the instructor intended as one of the topics for last week’s class. However, it was very valuable to me. I didn’t really have a good handle on the difference of collaborative and cooperative learning. I often use them interchangeably or together.
I then used my new found knowledge to view my online course. I found specific examples of collaborative learning – they had a big project and instead of working on the whole problem together they split it up – with four group members and four objectives -they each took one, tackled it independently then re-grouped and made it fit together. This is how I often see groups work and have worked in groups this way many times myself. I can’t think of many times where groups have worked cooperatively – this is much harder and requires much more interaction. There was, however, one time I can think of that my group worked cooperatively. We were in Tim’s Digital Video class and a few of us knew we like to work with certain people for groups (you know how that goes, as you get more into the program and meet more people and you figure out who you like to work with/who does their fair share and who you would rather not work with). Tim requires a group project and asked for groups of 3-5 members. Well a few of us knew who we would like to work with and those few liked to work with others that we hadn’t worked with before, so our group just branched out and we ended up wanting a group of seven. This was much larger than Tim’s intent, but he decided to let us work together as one group – of course, he doubled the requirements. Because of the large size and our comfort with each other we did work very cooperatively. We had lots of Saturday meetings and quite a few beers afterwards, but it was a lot of fun and we produced a quality project (check it out at http://itlab.coe.wayne.edu/srhodes/WSS/intro.html).
For online groups to be able to work collaboratively, there must be some ability to work synchronously I would think -- even if it is something as simple as a chat or skype. Speaking of synch and asynch, I have to go work on my special topic. See you in class.
I then used my new found knowledge to view my online course. I found specific examples of collaborative learning – they had a big project and instead of working on the whole problem together they split it up – with four group members and four objectives -they each took one, tackled it independently then re-grouped and made it fit together. This is how I often see groups work and have worked in groups this way many times myself. I can’t think of many times where groups have worked cooperatively – this is much harder and requires much more interaction. There was, however, one time I can think of that my group worked cooperatively. We were in Tim’s Digital Video class and a few of us knew we like to work with certain people for groups (you know how that goes, as you get more into the program and meet more people and you figure out who you like to work with/who does their fair share and who you would rather not work with). Tim requires a group project and asked for groups of 3-5 members. Well a few of us knew who we would like to work with and those few liked to work with others that we hadn’t worked with before, so our group just branched out and we ended up wanting a group of seven. This was much larger than Tim’s intent, but he decided to let us work together as one group – of course, he doubled the requirements. Because of the large size and our comfort with each other we did work very cooperatively. We had lots of Saturday meetings and quite a few beers afterwards, but it was a lot of fun and we produced a quality project (check it out at http://itlab.coe.wayne.edu/srhodes/WSS/intro.html).
For online groups to be able to work collaboratively, there must be some ability to work synchronously I would think -- even if it is something as simple as a chat or skype. Speaking of synch and asynch, I have to go work on my special topic. See you in class.
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Observations
It was good to hear about LMS from Trevor. He obviously did some research. Interestingly enough, the research shows some of the same things we already know – some faculty will use technology to varying degrees, peers influence adoption, support has to available, and younger faculty are more likely to use technology. Hopefully with the data to prove this, more universities will provide the necessary supports.
Although I pretty much forgot to turn in the peer evaluation, I think it is a great idea to offer the peer evaluations, especially, in an anonymous way. Trevor will get the feedback and no one will feel exposed. This way Trevor (and subsequent presenters) will receive valuable comments and be able to improve. I always find the comments on my instructor evaluations very helpful.
One of the topics we discussed in Trevor’s discussion activity at the end was some of the pros/cons of Bb. Our group said that the uniformity of most Bb sites made the interface very boring. I then read on my 7150 course site how the students were bothered by the fact that the use of Bb was different from other courses. They expected the content to differ but the basic interface to be the same. They found it distracting for things not to match up exactly. It’s funny how point of view can vary.
There also seems to be a few technical problems – files repeated in different menus, electronic versions of articles jumbled, etc.
I would assume that this being their 7th class, their 4th semester, a lot of these problems would be worked out.
It appears that there aren’t a whole lot of “meaningful” posts - a lot of “me too”, “I had the same problem”, etc. and the discussion thread dies as soon as Dr. Guerra posts. This ties in directly to the idea of when should the facilitator step in – too early and the post dies – too late and students are frustrated.
It was interesting to see how the groups were created (self selection) and how some took the lead, while other groups have just been formed.
As I read more into the reflections, the posts got more meaningful and really insightful. However, I am not seeing a lot of responses nor a lot of interaction, except, of course, from the instructor. She seems to answer or respond to most if not all posts – what a lot of work for her!! According to the record of viewed posts, not a lot of students are reading the posts either, at least not deep into the thread. I am also not seeing any personality – I would expect that these people somewhat know each other. No one is giving another student “a hard time”, there aren’t any jokes, and there isn’t any banter – how boring!! I couldn’t participate that way – maybe I am too much of a smart ass.
It also struck me that the initial post was made on the 8th, and there were no responses until the 15th and then ran through the 21st (it may be a short window that they are expected to post in and I missed those directions), but it seems so long in between initial request and adding content. Also it drove me nuts that they rarely changed the title (including the instructor/facilitator) – so I didn’t know what the message contained.
Of course, being a lurker, I don’t really know the rules or the interaction yet!! I’ll keep observing
Although I pretty much forgot to turn in the peer evaluation, I think it is a great idea to offer the peer evaluations, especially, in an anonymous way. Trevor will get the feedback and no one will feel exposed. This way Trevor (and subsequent presenters) will receive valuable comments and be able to improve. I always find the comments on my instructor evaluations very helpful.
One of the topics we discussed in Trevor’s discussion activity at the end was some of the pros/cons of Bb. Our group said that the uniformity of most Bb sites made the interface very boring. I then read on my 7150 course site how the students were bothered by the fact that the use of Bb was different from other courses. They expected the content to differ but the basic interface to be the same. They found it distracting for things not to match up exactly. It’s funny how point of view can vary.
There also seems to be a few technical problems – files repeated in different menus, electronic versions of articles jumbled, etc.
I would assume that this being their 7th class, their 4th semester, a lot of these problems would be worked out.
It appears that there aren’t a whole lot of “meaningful” posts - a lot of “me too”, “I had the same problem”, etc. and the discussion thread dies as soon as Dr. Guerra posts. This ties in directly to the idea of when should the facilitator step in – too early and the post dies – too late and students are frustrated.
It was interesting to see how the groups were created (self selection) and how some took the lead, while other groups have just been formed.
As I read more into the reflections, the posts got more meaningful and really insightful. However, I am not seeing a lot of responses nor a lot of interaction, except, of course, from the instructor. She seems to answer or respond to most if not all posts – what a lot of work for her!! According to the record of viewed posts, not a lot of students are reading the posts either, at least not deep into the thread. I am also not seeing any personality – I would expect that these people somewhat know each other. No one is giving another student “a hard time”, there aren’t any jokes, and there isn’t any banter – how boring!! I couldn’t participate that way – maybe I am too much of a smart ass.
It also struck me that the initial post was made on the 8th, and there were no responses until the 15th and then ran through the 21st (it may be a short window that they are expected to post in and I missed those directions), but it seems so long in between initial request and adding content. Also it drove me nuts that they rarely changed the title (including the instructor/facilitator) – so I didn’t know what the message contained.
Of course, being a lurker, I don’t really know the rules or the interaction yet!! I’ll keep observing
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
