A former SCSU faculty asked me to help her with literature regarding online learning; she is applying to teach complete online somewhere in the South.
Hey Plamen, Do you have any reading suggestions regarding teaching online? I am applying for a job at ?????? and the program is completely online. I want to be current with the literature if I happen to get an interview.
Hey ???,
It is a simple question, with ever growing complex answer. 2013 was announced as the “MOOC” year and that term literally killed the tag “online education.” Most of the literature on online teaching now is subdued one way or another under MOOC.
However, there are still authors, who are widely cited as “foundational.” E.g.: Susan Ko, Paloff and Pratt
Ko, S., & Rossen, S. (2010). Teaching Online: A Practical Guide. Taylor & Francis.
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2010). Collaborating Online: Learning Together in Community. John Wiley & Sons.
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2009). Assessing the Online Learner: Resources and Strategies for Faculty. John Wiley & Sons.
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2005). Distance education: A systems view (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth. http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic541040.files/Moore%20Theoretical%20Basis%20for%20Distance%20Education.pdf
Moore, M. G. (2013). Handbook of Distance Education. Routledge.
There is a long list of articles, which I am collecting through the years. You can peruse them and choose any further readings, if you want…
Adolphus, M. (2009). USING THE WEB TO teach information literacy. Online, 33(4), 20-25.
Andersen, M. H. (2011). The world is my school: Welcome to the era of personalized learning. Futurist, 45(1), 12-17.
Borja, R. R. (2004). New player in online school market pursues profits. Education Week, 24(15), 8-8.
Brooks-Kirkland, A. (2006). Podcasting for learning. School Libraries in Canada (17108535), 25(4), 44-48.
Ćukušić, M., Alfirević, N., Granić, A., & Garača, Ž. (2010). e-learning process management and the e-learning performance: Results of a european empirical study. Computers & Education, 55(2), 554-565.
Ćukušić, M., Alfirević, N., Granić, A., & Garača, Ž. (2010). e-learning process management and the e-learning performance: Results of a european empirical study. Computers & Education, 55(2), 554-565.
Ćukušić, M., Alfirević, N., Granić, A., & Garača, Ž. (2010). e-learning process management and the e-learning performance: Results of a european empirical study. Computers & Education, 55(2), 554-565.
de Freitas, S., & Veletsianos, G. (2010). Editorial: Crossing boundaries: Learning and teaching in virtual worlds. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 3-9.
Department of education report: Its importance, one year later. (cover story).(2010). Distance Education Report, 15(12), 1-7.
Falloon, G. (2010). Using avatars and virtual environments in learning: What do they have to offer? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 108-122.
Hrastinski, S., Keller, C., & Carlsson, S. A. (2010). Design exemplars for synchronous e-learning: A design theory approach. Computers & Education, 55(2), 652-662.
Karagiorgi, Y., & Symeou, L. (2005). Translating constructivism into instructional design: Potential and limitations. Educational Technology & Society, 8(1), 17-27.
Keengwe, J., Schnellert, G., & Miltenoff, P. (2011). Technology and globalization in higher education., 2535-2538.
Ketelhut, D. J., Nelson, B. C., Clarke, J., & Dede, C. (2010). A multi-user virtual environment for building and assessing higher order inquiry skills in science. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 56-68.
Kim, P., Ng, C. K., & Lim, G. (2010). When cloud computing meets with semantic web: A new design for e-portfolio systems in the social media era. British Journal of Educational Technology,41(6), 1018-1028.
Kolowich, S. (2009). MIT tops world ranking of university web sites. Chronicle of Higher Education, 55(24), A15-A15.
Leach, J. (2008). Do new information and communications technologies have a role to play in the achievement of education for all? British Educational Research Journal, 34(6), 783-805.
Levine, A., Levine, A., & Dean, D. R. (2012). Generation on a tightrope : A portrait of today’s college student. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mangu-Ward, K. (2010). Teachers unions vs. online education. Reason, 42(4), 44-50.
Nistor, N., & Neubauer, K. (2010). From participation to dropout: Quantitative participation patterns in online university courses. Computers & Education, 55(2), 663-672.
Ramig, R. (2009). Social media in the classroom. Multimedia & internet@schools, 16(6), 8-10.
Ramig, R. (2009). Social media in the classroom. Multimedia & internet@schools, 16(6), 8-10.
Schiller, K. (2009). Augmented reality comes to market. (cover story). Information Today, 26(11), 1-46.
Šumak, B., Heričko, M., & Pušnik, M. (2011). A meta-analysis of e-learning technology acceptance: The role of user types and e-learning technology types. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2067-2077.
Tallent-Runnels, M., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., et al. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93-135.
Tallent-Runnels, M., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., et al. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93-135.
Tallent-Runnels, M., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., et al. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93-135.
Wang, H., & Shao, M. (2008). Desire2Learn for quality matters., 1335-1339.
1. Green room at cCETL
podcasts, live streaming
3 is the magic number, having 3 students
mavtube on kaltura as YouTube channel
how does it help faculty? hi end lecture capture. Collaboration for two experts, they can use the green screen. Use the background.
How decisions are made. Is faculty involved. This center is one time deal, money spent on production. Innovative technology for $40K. It might be more. No time to survey people what they want. There are other technologies which people can try out and then expand on them.
Bunch of smart boards, but not sure if people are. Using them. Software and apps only here at the CETL, not on the. Rest of the campus. People will try but get stuck with that technology Only.
staffing snow students.
#pm #techworkshop #LectureCApture http://ow.ly/i/4ex06 http://ow.ly/i/4ex0v
web page and linkedin are the social media they are using
the CETL is housing people with different bosses. Closes collaboration is technology and CETL, not research yet. D2l specialist and hardware people are coming to CETL. StarID conversion is hosted in CETL. Library had to give up spaceto CEyl and like at Scsu problematic.
Assessment certificate. Sustainability and budget.
Summer money for class redesign. Cohort of people who can focus on that. flipped classroom study abroad etc as themes.
New provost wants decisions to be data driven. Is there an office like institutional research. Use only quantitative data but thinking about qualitative interviews.
generation on a tightrope
http://www.amazon.com/Generation-Tightrope-Portrait-College-Student/dp/0470376295
working with the librarians took time also. make aware librarians of the lecture capture for instructional purposes.
Focus is student learning.
Curiculum maPiping speaker and CETL is asking how can follow up.
Mark Zuckerberg’s Sister Published A Book About A Child Whose Mom Takes Her iPad Away
http://www.businessinsider.com/randi-zuckerbergs-kids-book-dot-2013-11#ixzz2jmchiAAf
social media etiquette
unplug
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/03/books/review/randi-zuckerbergs-dot-complicated-and-dot.html
Contemplative Pedagogy and Dealing with Technology
Dan Barbezat, Amherst College; David Levy, University of Washington
https://docs.google.com/viewer?pid=sites&srcid=cG9kbmV0d29yay5vcmd8d2lraXBvZGlhfGd4OjY4MDVkOTRlNGQyODY0ZjY&docid=9ffbca34d1874ac24b0a339bd01f94cf%7Cbeba8a8cdb041811cbd3136e0fdbd53b&a=bi&pagenumber=45&w=800
The accelerating pace of life is reducing the time for thoughtful reflection and in particular for contemplative scholarship, within the academy. The loss of time to think is occurring at exactly the moment when scholars, educators, and students have gained access to digital tools of great value to scholarship. This interactive session reviews research on technology’s impacts and demonstrates some contemplative practices that can respond to them. Contemplative pedagogy can offset the distractions of our multi-tasking, multi-media culture, and show how the needs of this generation of students can be met through innovative teaching methods that integrate secular practices of contemplation.
Topics: Faculty Professional Development, Teaching & Learning
Walking the Labyrinth: Contemplative Instructional Techniques to Enhance Learner Engagement
Carol Henderson and Janice Monroe, Ithaca College
Bringing ancient traditional meditative skills into the contemporary classroom, con-templative learning techniques serve as an effective counterbalance to the speedi-ness and distractions of today’s fast-paced technology-based cultural environment. Applicable to both faculty development programs and to faculty working directlywith students, contemplative methods create a richer, more engaging learningenvironment by allowing participants to quiet their minds and focus deeply on the material at hand. This interactive session provides instruction and practice in con-templative techniques, offers examples of their use, and supports the integration of these techniques into any discipline or subject area.
Topics: Faculty Professional Development, Teaching & Learning
Contemplative Computing and Our Future of Education
Alex Soojung-Kim Pang, Stanford University
A generation of educators have spent their professional lives hearing that technol-
ogy is changing the world, transforming the way we think, and that higher educa-
tion must evolve or become obsolete. In case you didn’t get the message in the
1960s and 1970s, with cassette tapes, television and mainframe computers, it was
repeated in the 1980s when personal computers appeared; repeated again in the
1990s, with CD-ROMs (remember those) and the World Wide Web; repeated again
in the early 2000s with blogs and wikis; and recently, repeated once again in the
wake of social media, YouTube and the real-time Web.
This language of technological revolution and institutional reaction is backward. It
gives too much credit and agency to technology, and makes today’s changes seem
unprecedented and inevitable. Neither is actually true. Contemplative computing—
the effort to design technologies and interactions that aren’t perpetually demanding
and distracting, but help users be more mindful and focused—provides a language
for talking differently about the place of technology in teaching, learning, and edu-
cation. We think of today’s technologies as uniquely appealing to our reptilian, dopa-
mine- and stimulation-craving brains. In reality, distraction is an ancient problem,
and the rise of contemplative practices and institutions (most notably monasteries
and universities) is a response to that problem. Abandoning our traditional role as
stewards of contemplative life is as dangerous for the societies we serve as it is
short-sighted and counterproductive. Contemplative computing argues that even
today, people have choices about how to interact with technologies, how to use
them, and how to make the parts of our extended minds; and that part of our job
as educators is to show students how to exercise that agency.