Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
EDUC-8842-2: Assessing Collaborative Efforts
Beall-Davis_S
EDUC-8842-2: Assessing Collaborative Efforts
As I reflect on George Siemens presentation in terms of assessments within distance education and collaborative environments, my mind wonders to earlier days when as an instructor, I simply gave test or quizzes to evaluate my students. Observations additionally played a significant part, but none the less not as complex as now!
According to Siemens (2010), assessments are teacher based activities and must be orchestrated within a distance learning environment much differently from traditional brick and mortar environments. Assessments must be fair and equitable! Although most of the assessment responsibilities can be offloaded into peer environments, there are still many other areas to be dealt with. Peer reviews which are a major resource in collaborative environments, prompt the usage of questionnaires or other rating schemes which assist in balancing the assessment matrix for faculty. Other opportunities to provide fair and equitable feedback include direct comments from peers or natural feedback from subject matter experts (e.g., peripheral participation). Whatever the measuring system is, the results should be beyond the “mark grade system”, based on outcomes and the degree of the student’s growth. I tend to agree with the methods provided by Siemens (2010) in term of assessments not simply being a grade or mark, but other activities within the distance learning environment must translate into a fair grading system. Examples include:
•Contribution logs (e.g., Wikis, blogging or LMS tracking systems).
•Student’s time spent in the distance learning environment (e.g., Start and stop times of students login).
•Hours of time spent performing task online – Time on task!
•Feedback from online communities.
As stated by Siemen, the view of education has been broadening! No longer do we have classroom confinements. Educators now recognize corporate and personal distance learning environments demand and expect everyone in the distant learning community to contribute through consistent collaborative efforts. No longer can we as educators depend on tests that are uni-dimensional. Siemens also pointed out that one of the biggest challenges of getting students to participate in distance learning environments revolved around the older mindsets of always being an individual contributor – the expert or genius. The transition from being rewarded on an individual level is now challenged by the collaborative efforts of others. I tend to agree with Siemens’ (2010) when he prescribes bringing in a subject matter experts (SME) and making the student comfortable with new technologies. He additionally recommends blogging where the students make contributions to the public, yet maintains his or her individualism. I think the bigger message from Siemens was to minimize the feelings of student’s loss of self and trust supported by a well connected high functioning learning community.
References
Anderson, T. (2008). The Theory and Practice of Online Learning. AU Press, Athabasca University.
Siemens, G. (2010). Assessments of Collaborative Learning. Retrieved on July 14th, 2010 from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4199700&Survey=1&47=379734&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
Siemens, G. (2010). Learning Communities. Retrieved on July 14th, 2010 from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4199700&Survey=1&47=379734&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
EDUC-8842-2: Assessing Collaborative Efforts
As I reflect on George Siemens presentation in terms of assessments within distance education and collaborative environments, my mind wonders to earlier days when as an instructor, I simply gave test or quizzes to evaluate my students. Observations additionally played a significant part, but none the less not as complex as now!
According to Siemens (2010), assessments are teacher based activities and must be orchestrated within a distance learning environment much differently from traditional brick and mortar environments. Assessments must be fair and equitable! Although most of the assessment responsibilities can be offloaded into peer environments, there are still many other areas to be dealt with. Peer reviews which are a major resource in collaborative environments, prompt the usage of questionnaires or other rating schemes which assist in balancing the assessment matrix for faculty. Other opportunities to provide fair and equitable feedback include direct comments from peers or natural feedback from subject matter experts (e.g., peripheral participation). Whatever the measuring system is, the results should be beyond the “mark grade system”, based on outcomes and the degree of the student’s growth. I tend to agree with the methods provided by Siemens (2010) in term of assessments not simply being a grade or mark, but other activities within the distance learning environment must translate into a fair grading system. Examples include:
•Contribution logs (e.g., Wikis, blogging or LMS tracking systems).
•Student’s time spent in the distance learning environment (e.g., Start and stop times of students login).
•Hours of time spent performing task online – Time on task!
•Feedback from online communities.
As stated by Siemen, the view of education has been broadening! No longer do we have classroom confinements. Educators now recognize corporate and personal distance learning environments demand and expect everyone in the distant learning community to contribute through consistent collaborative efforts. No longer can we as educators depend on tests that are uni-dimensional. Siemens also pointed out that one of the biggest challenges of getting students to participate in distance learning environments revolved around the older mindsets of always being an individual contributor – the expert or genius. The transition from being rewarded on an individual level is now challenged by the collaborative efforts of others. I tend to agree with Siemens’ (2010) when he prescribes bringing in a subject matter experts (SME) and making the student comfortable with new technologies. He additionally recommends blogging where the students make contributions to the public, yet maintains his or her individualism. I think the bigger message from Siemens was to minimize the feelings of student’s loss of self and trust supported by a well connected high functioning learning community.
References
Anderson, T. (2008). The Theory and Practice of Online Learning. AU Press, Athabasca University.
Siemens, G. (2010). Assessments of Collaborative Learning. Retrieved on July 14th, 2010 from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4199700&Survey=1&47=379734&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
Siemens, G. (2010). Learning Communities. Retrieved on July 14th, 2010 from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4199700&Survey=1&47=379734&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
EDUC-8842 "
Sbeall-Davis Mod3_TOC_Assignment WK6_MOD3
Table of Content
I.Efficacy of Learning in Virtual Worlds with a focus on Second Life: Snapshot of Future Roles for Learners and Teachers.
II. What is Second Life?
a. Formal Definition-- Linden Labs
b. Second Life – vs. - Brick and Mortar
c. Virtual Formal and Informal contact
d. Accessibility
e. Global Access
f. Constraints
g. Reciprocity and Cooperation
h. Decreasing the Humiliation Factor
i. Peer Review
j. Expert Exposure and Opportunity
III. Why Consider Second Life for Education?
a. Faculty and student collaboration
b. Cooperative Exchanges
c. Active Learning
d. Real-time Feedback
e. Time on Task
f. Performance Expectations
g. Diverse Learning Style
IV. Active learning
a. Role Plays
b. Constructivism
c. Real World Applications
d. Superiority
V. Avatars
a. What are Avatars?
b. Assessing Student Performance
c. Spaces
VI. Performance Expectations
a. Peer review
b. Public Awareness
c. Expectation levels
VII. Respect and Diversity
a. Learning Styles
b. Barrier Elimination
c. Community and Collaboration
d. Avatars and Relationships
VIII. Role of Teacher and Learner
a. Teacher Role
i. Knowledge facilitators
ii. Process and Procedures
iii. Concepts
iv. Constructivism
v. Self directed Activities
b. Student Role
i. Constructivism
ii. Respect and appreciation of varying cultures
iii. Etiquette
IX. Future of Education and Second Life
a. Value Proposition
X. Conclusion
a. Thank You!
Table of Content
I.Efficacy of Learning in Virtual Worlds with a focus on Second Life: Snapshot of Future Roles for Learners and Teachers.
II. What is Second Life?
a. Formal Definition-- Linden Labs
b. Second Life – vs. - Brick and Mortar
c. Virtual Formal and Informal contact
d. Accessibility
e. Global Access
f. Constraints
g. Reciprocity and Cooperation
h. Decreasing the Humiliation Factor
i. Peer Review
j. Expert Exposure and Opportunity
III. Why Consider Second Life for Education?
a. Faculty and student collaboration
b. Cooperative Exchanges
c. Active Learning
d. Real-time Feedback
e. Time on Task
f. Performance Expectations
g. Diverse Learning Style
IV. Active learning
a. Role Plays
b. Constructivism
c. Real World Applications
d. Superiority
V. Avatars
a. What are Avatars?
b. Assessing Student Performance
c. Spaces
VI. Performance Expectations
a. Peer review
b. Public Awareness
c. Expectation levels
VII. Respect and Diversity
a. Learning Styles
b. Barrier Elimination
c. Community and Collaboration
d. Avatars and Relationships
VIII. Role of Teacher and Learner
a. Teacher Role
i. Knowledge facilitators
ii. Process and Procedures
iii. Concepts
iv. Constructivism
v. Self directed Activities
b. Student Role
i. Constructivism
ii. Respect and appreciation of varying cultures
iii. Etiquette
IX. Future of Education and Second Life
a. Value Proposition
X. Conclusion
a. Thank You!
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Elements of Distance Education Diffusion: Evolution
Beall-Davis_S
EDUC-8842_Mod2
Global diversity, communication and collaborative interaction are key elements which are uniquely individualized from F2F classes, ultimately enhancing the learning experience (George Siemens, 2009). Although all three elements bring a vast amount of value to the learning community and have evolved substantially, I tend to feel that collaborative interaction has surpassed the others. According to Siemens (2009), the growing acceptance of distance education is largely due to “more of us having experiences communicating online”.
As I reflect back over the last 30 years that I’ve been in the IT industry, I recall the first personal computer I supported as a field engineer for Digital Equipment Corporation. It was a “Rainbow 100”. The Rainbow came in three models, the 100A, 100B and 100+. Fully loaded and shipped to the customer it had about 128K of memory and 64K CPU. Oh yea, it had a floppy disk which held about 120 mega bytes of data! For those of you who never heard of a floppy disk, it’s kind of like a USB flash drive with a lot less storage capacity. Although its name said personal computer, very few individuals could afford to have one in their home, they were most often sold to educational institutions and businesses. Within University labs, I would watch the computer science student’s logon to these stand-alone systems to churn out assignments. During that time (late 70’s and early 80’s) most collaboration in terms of computer systems took place among those who were of an elite group referred to as highly technical or power users. The communication was pretty much limited to local area networks (LANs)for those types of institutions. Collaboration and collaboration tools were few. Today the internet and intranets are accessible to almost everyone and its a thousand plus times cheaper to own computers or other smart devices. Due to the evolution of innovative computer technologies it’s considerably easier to reach those you love via high-speed internet with a variety of collaborative tools.
Low cost along with accessibility to computer systems, user friendly applications and the internet has boosted the confidence levels of the technically savvy and those novices in terms of getting online and communicating with family, friends or co-workers.
Do I feel that collaboration interaction is being adopted and continues to evolve? Yes, past adoptions of new technology for education have signaled a confidence in its potential to alleviate a particular problem or to make a job easier or more efficient (Carr.V, 2010). Through increased usage of user friendly applications which support collaboration, people have gained a sense of comfort and even discovery that meaningful relationships can develop using online medium (Siemens, 2009). According to Rogers (1995) “Innovation Decision Process theory”, potential adopters of a technology progress over time through five stages in the diffusion process. First, they must learn about the innovation (knowledge); second, they must be persuaded of the value of the innovation (persuasion); they then must decide to adopt it (decision); the innovation must then be implemented (implementation); and finally, the decision must be reaffirmed or rejected (confirmation). The focus is on the user or adopter. It is clear that not only has collaboration interaction evolved, but it is globally adopted due to the progressive evolution of innovative technologies!
Reference
Carr.V. H. ( 2010). Technology Adoption and Diffusion. Retrieved on June 30th, 2010 from http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/innovation/adoptiondiffusion.htm
Charvaughn. (2009). Elements of Distance Education Diffusion. Retrieved on June 30th, 2010 from http://charvaughn.blogspot.com/
Hanley, M. (2009). Factors Influencing Learning Design: Discovering Instructional Design. Retrieved on June 30th, 2010 http://eduspaces.net/mhanley/weblog/700114.html
Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press.
Seimens, George. (2010). The Future of distance Education. Video posted to http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4199700&Survey=1&47=3797374&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
EDUC-8842_Mod2
Global diversity, communication and collaborative interaction are key elements which are uniquely individualized from F2F classes, ultimately enhancing the learning experience (George Siemens, 2009). Although all three elements bring a vast amount of value to the learning community and have evolved substantially, I tend to feel that collaborative interaction has surpassed the others. According to Siemens (2009), the growing acceptance of distance education is largely due to “more of us having experiences communicating online”.
As I reflect back over the last 30 years that I’ve been in the IT industry, I recall the first personal computer I supported as a field engineer for Digital Equipment Corporation. It was a “Rainbow 100”. The Rainbow came in three models, the 100A, 100B and 100+. Fully loaded and shipped to the customer it had about 128K of memory and 64K CPU. Oh yea, it had a floppy disk which held about 120 mega bytes of data! For those of you who never heard of a floppy disk, it’s kind of like a USB flash drive with a lot less storage capacity. Although its name said personal computer, very few individuals could afford to have one in their home, they were most often sold to educational institutions and businesses. Within University labs, I would watch the computer science student’s logon to these stand-alone systems to churn out assignments. During that time (late 70’s and early 80’s) most collaboration in terms of computer systems took place among those who were of an elite group referred to as highly technical or power users. The communication was pretty much limited to local area networks (LANs)for those types of institutions. Collaboration and collaboration tools were few. Today the internet and intranets are accessible to almost everyone and its a thousand plus times cheaper to own computers or other smart devices. Due to the evolution of innovative computer technologies it’s considerably easier to reach those you love via high-speed internet with a variety of collaborative tools.
Low cost along with accessibility to computer systems, user friendly applications and the internet has boosted the confidence levels of the technically savvy and those novices in terms of getting online and communicating with family, friends or co-workers.
Do I feel that collaboration interaction is being adopted and continues to evolve? Yes, past adoptions of new technology for education have signaled a confidence in its potential to alleviate a particular problem or to make a job easier or more efficient (Carr.V, 2010). Through increased usage of user friendly applications which support collaboration, people have gained a sense of comfort and even discovery that meaningful relationships can develop using online medium (Siemens, 2009). According to Rogers (1995) “Innovation Decision Process theory”, potential adopters of a technology progress over time through five stages in the diffusion process. First, they must learn about the innovation (knowledge); second, they must be persuaded of the value of the innovation (persuasion); they then must decide to adopt it (decision); the innovation must then be implemented (implementation); and finally, the decision must be reaffirmed or rejected (confirmation). The focus is on the user or adopter. It is clear that not only has collaboration interaction evolved, but it is globally adopted due to the progressive evolution of innovative technologies!
Reference
Carr.V. H. ( 2010). Technology Adoption and Diffusion. Retrieved on June 30th, 2010 from http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/innovation/adoptiondiffusion.htm
Charvaughn. (2009). Elements of Distance Education Diffusion. Retrieved on June 30th, 2010 from http://charvaughn.blogspot.com/
Hanley, M. (2009). Factors Influencing Learning Design: Discovering Instructional Design. Retrieved on June 30th, 2010 http://eduspaces.net/mhanley/weblog/700114.html
Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press.
Seimens, George. (2010). The Future of distance Education. Video posted to http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4199700&Survey=1&47=3797374&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)