Posting for MODULE 2 - Jeriann King

The element of communication has evolved dramatically in education over the last one hundred years.  When my father was in school, the teacher talked, and the students listened.  If they spoke, it was to recite back to the teacher the lesson just presented.  Communication was a one-way portal with the student always on the receiving end.  School for my generation changed from that picture slightly.  We engaged in organized debates and discussions.  The teacher still functioned as the principal organizer.  The topic and setting were part of the instructional design.  We could communicate by asking questions and completing the group assignments as directed. 

Students in the classroom today can experience a variety of communication options.  Some classrooms function in much the same way as what was there for my generation.  In other classrooms, students have choices to make about an assignment.  They collaborate in teams and improve projects on feedback provided by peers and teachers.  Communication occurs through verbal dialogue, email communication, blogs, wikis and networking sites.  When a student enters an online classroom, the communication opportunities are part of the course structure.  Videos, discussion groups and chat rooms enter the mix for student communication.  Instructors have virtual office hours.  Skype becomes a standard protocol.  Since an online classroom does not have casual opportunities for dialogue like a student lounge, course designers purposefully establish areas for communication. 

Research continues to explore the importance of communication in the classroom.  Not only does a clear channel of communication forestall misunderstanding, it also paves the well for establishing relationships.  Transforming a classroom into a collaborative exchange can empower students.  Using communication technology can help convert the learning experience from a teacher-driven to a student-driven enterprise (Wong & Li, 2011).  Explore the following websites for additional information on developing communication skills in the classroom.

http://www.only-effective-communication-skills.com/communication-skills-for-teachers.html

http://www.myeducationadvices.com/how-to-improve-communication-between-teachers-and-students/

There are some interesting blogs about collaboration and the human response. Check out these options.

http://dpl.collaborate.com/blog/2012/06/15/why-collaboration

http://blogs.gartner.com/andrea_dimaio/2012/06/28/the-essence-of-collaboration-is-selfishness/

Reference:

Wong, E. L., & Li, S. C. (2011). Framing ICT implementation in a context of educational change: A structural equation modelling analysis. Australasian Journal Of Educational Technology, 27(2), 361-379.

Module 1 - Evolution of Distance Education

Distance education is rapidly evolving and impacting corporations, higher education, and K-12 learning environments.  Educators and instructional designers should evaluate this evolution and provide guidance and support to steer the development of the concept.  It is equally important to acknowledge that, for a course to attain maximum impact, educators must consider the teacher, the student, and the learning involved (Huett, Moller, Foshay, & Coleman, 2008). 

The diffusion of distance education is reaching the critical mass stage of adoption (Laureate Education, 2008a).  The proliferation of online courses has spread from corporate training programs, into higher education settings and finally into the K-12 environment.  The economics of this concept proved extremely appealing to the corporate structure.  In this environment, employees complete a training module and perhaps an assessment of the material.  This can eliminate travel costs and work loss learning material repetitively required in the workforce.  Corporate training programs included minimal reviews for quality assurance or objective fulfillment.  Bluntly stated, employers did not focus on developing engaging material or expanding the employee’s knowledge base.  The purpose was to deliver a specified content in an efficient manner.  Trainers evaluated the success of a course by the hours of use and the physical presentation (Moller, Forshay, Huett, 2008a). 

As distance education moved into the higher education arena, economics continued to play a pivotal role.  Institutions of higher learning saw distance education courses as a way to expand their client base.  A distance course provided access to students that were far from the physical campus.  Rather than designing programs with the full range of technological benefits, these courses mimicked the offerings of a traditional college classroom (Moller, Foshay, Huett, 2008b).  Expanding that transformation to include the full power of technology is a challenge for instructional designers.  Professors can resist this level of change as it infringes on their domain in the classroom. 

The laggard in adoption of distance education would seem to be the K-12 education level.  There is no central structure of the K-12 group in the United States. This creates a barrier when trying to establish connections beneficial for rapid diffusion.  There is also the potentially false assumption that spending resources similar to classroom budgets on technology courses will produce effective instruction (Huett, Moller, Foshay, & Coleman, 2008).  Distance education has to potential to address issues in public education like overcrowding, inconsistency of content delivery, and teacher shortages.  My district pays critical skills bonuses to math and science teachers for 7^th to 12^th grade because it is difficult to find certified teachers for those subjects. The potential for distance education in K-12 is the greatest of the three groups.  This reflects the late adoption within this group and the opportunities available that distance education can address.

I agree with the assessment of Dr. Michael Simonson that distance education is approaching the exponential growth phase on the diffusion curve (Laureate Education, 2008a).  Acknowledging that the product produced in a distance education course does not have to mimic the appearance of a traditional classroom will help spur on that diffusion.  Equivalency theory posits that distance courses do not have to have an identical appearance to a face –to-face classroom (Laureate Education, 2008b).  The learning outcomes should produce comparable results as a classroom that covers similar content.  That refers to the knowledge gained and not the products the students produce. 

References

Moller, L., Forshay, W. R., & Huett, J. (2008). The Evolution of Distance Education: Implications for Instructional Design on the Potential of the Web. Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice To Improve Learning, 52(3), 70-75. doi:10.1007/s11528-008-0158-5

Moller, L., Foshay, W. R., & Huett, J. (2008). The Evolution of Distance Education: Implications for Instructional Design on the Potential of the Web. Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice To Improve Learning, 52(4), 66-70. doi:10.1007/s11528-008-0179-0

Huett, J., Moller, L., Foshay, W. R., & Coleman, C. (2008). The Evolution of Distance Education: Implications for Instructional Design on the Potential of the Web. Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice To Improve Learning, 52(5), 63-67. doi:10.1007/s11528-008-0199-9

Laureate Education, Inc. (2008). Distance Education: The Next Generation.  Principles of Distance Education. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (2008). Equivalency Theory.  Principles of Distance Education. Baltimore, MD: Author.

EDUC 8842

Blog Postings for EDUC 8842 - June 2012

Module 6 Responses

I posted responses to Karen and Aimee for Module 6.

Learning in a Digital Age

Learning is a life-long event that is the central focus to all our accomplishments.  Learning occurs across the spectrum of favorable circumstances and negative ones.  It is not only about what happens in school.  We learn every day of our lives and can benefit from having some level of control over our learning.  I have sat in classrooms as a student, learned while teaching, participated in book studies, completed online classes, and struggled through hands on experiments.  All of these produced learning, although some were more effective than others.  Critical elements include focus, willingness, and, in some regards, aptitude.  I can zone out during a training session and learn something, just not the topic of the training!  I can enter into a book study grudgingly, and learn very little about the book.  I can sit in a science class, and due to my lack of schema, struggle to master the troublesome material.  The nonnegotiable elements in teaching are garnering the attention of the students, demonstrate the relevance of the material, and scaffold the learning to avoid student frustration.  Many adult learners have the ability to manage their own learning by establishing focus and willingness on their own.  They will study supplemental material or find a tutor to master material above their learning level.  That responsibility transfers to the teacher for our younger learners, however.  Part of the learning process for them is to develop those self-management skills.

The concepts of focus, willingness, and aptitude tie in with key learning theories.  John Keller’s ARCS model addresses the elements of attention and relevance.  A student can apply a level of focus if the teacher captures their attention on the material.  Sometimes the student shows interest in spite of the teacher due to an innate interest in the subject.  The role of the teacher is to capture their interest if it is not naturally occurring.  Willingness relates to relevance.  When a student identifies the value in the learning, they are willing to give the lesson their full attention.  The aptitude of every student varies across all subjects.  In a single classroom, a teacher encounters students with various aptitude levels.  Lev Vygotsky’s proposed the concept of scaffolding to address these differing levels.  His learning theory suggests that each learner has a zone of proximal development.  If the material is above the learner’s ability level, he or she will struggle to mastery.  Some students will shut down and cease to learn entirely.  This is also true at the other end of the spectrum.  If the material is substantially below the student’s learning level, he or she might sleep through class!  It is quite a balancing act to meet the learning needs of students across such a wide spectrum. 

Further information:

ARCS model:

http://www.arcsmodel.com/ 

Vygotsky:

http://www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html

Responses to Module 5

I posted responses for Module 5 to Aderonke and Joshua Sherman.

Module 5 - New Technologies

A few years ago my principal asked me to train fellow teachers on the use of a lesson plan software system purchased by our district.  This system had the ability to format lesson plans, attach state objectives to each plan, track the use of the state objectives, and automatically update administration for each plan.  It accomplished everything the district required of teachers for documentation of lesson plans.  My love of technology and desire to locate new tools to accomplish required tasks supported my desire to teach the class.  In my naïveté, I assumed everyone would see the value of the system and eagerly learn how to put it to proper use.   

            I certainly misunderstood my audience.  Even before the training session began I received abundant questions and complaints.  Many teachers felt the requirement for documentation infringed on their independence in the classroom.  They attended the training session because the district required them to do so.  Their apprehension about the intent behind the program’s use and how difficult it would be to use colored their willingness to learn.  The session began with many participants covertly hostile.  They grudgingly sat and listened and performed the activities set in front of them.  When they walked out of the training, I knew that 90% of them never intended to use the software again.  This response occurred across all the schools in my district.  A few people used the program sparingly for the next two years and then the program faded from the system.   

            Now I ask, what could be done to change the response to this failed implementation?  One of the first problems to address is the apprehension related to increased documentation.  The audience was not ready to learn how to use the program.  They were still too concerned about the heavier burden they perceived it represented.  Following Keller’s ARCS model, I would recommend the following steps for handling a similar situation: 

Keller’s ARCS model 

A:  Attention 

R:  Relevance 

C:  Confidence 

S:  Satisfaction 

1.    Attention – Before beginning the training, gain the attention of the audience.  The first time the teachers hear about this new program should not coincide with increased documenting responsibilities.  Advance notification of these requirements, along with a time frame for implementation, would help in this area.  There are valid reasons to provide documentation that pertain to each teacher.  There is increasing evidence of lawsuits by parents when teachers do not teach the established curriculum.  Having documentation that you cover all state objectives in your classroom provides insurance from these lawsuits.  The program should be offered as a time saving solution to this documentation problem.  As soon as the presenter convinces the group of the need, it will be easier to grasp their attention when providing an efficient solution to the problem.  Sustaining their attention is the next critical need.  The design of the training was hands on and could have accomplished this task.  There were several helpers walking around giving assistance as needed and helping to diffuse the diversity in the learner’s abilities.   

2.    Relevance – This ties into the method for gaining their attention.  The relevance perceived by each teacher connects to the understanding of the need for documentation.  They need assured that they must provide the documentation using some method.  The software would be a fast and easy method, and thus supplies the most logical choice. 

3.    Confidence – Several of the participants needed positive feedback and reassurance about the software usage.  Assuring enough trainers assist in the presentation is critical for individual feedback.  The trainers need to be proficient in the usage of the program, so they can instill confidence in the students. 

4.    Satisfaction – Emphasizing the natural consequences of using this program will be helpful for the participants.  Teachers show interest in tools that are easy to use, and provide a more efficient way to complete required duties.  This training needed to emphasize those features continuously through the demonstration. 

References

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3^rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.