Storyboard for video

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.