Archive of ‘instructional technology’ category

synchronous online learning

Most Faculty Tackle Synchronous Online Instruction Ill-Prepared

By Dian Schaffhauser 09/22/16

https://campustechnology.com/articles/2016/09/22/most-faculty-tackle-synchronous-online-instruction-ill-prepared.aspx

a new report from the Online Learning Consortium, a non-profit professional organization that aims to help educators integrate best practices into their online instruction. The OLC researchers involved in developing “What Can We Learn From Our Colleagues? A Framework for Virtual Classroom Training” solicited online responses from 733 people with “substantial” experience in teaching and “significant” experience in online.

Among the instructors who had taught using a synchronous classroom, two thirds (66 percent) had received training specifically on how to do that. A quarter (27 percent) received a month or more of training; a third (32 percent) received less than a day. A remarkable 55 percent took their training before going into a virtual classroom.

Half of the respondents were primarily self-taught; only 24 percent received formal training; and the remaining 26 percent did their learning through informal conversations with peers who teach synchronously. The training included lots of reading, video tutorials and listening to lectures — in other words, as the report’s authors noted, “sage on the stage” activities that are “antithetical to effective virtual classroom pedagogy.” Forty-one percent of people said synchronous activities “played little or no role in their virtual classroom training”; only 30 percent found that synchronous activities did play a substantial role.

What didn’t exist in training for almost four in five respondents were any of the following:

  • “Shadowing” of an experienced online instructor;
  • Teaching or co-teaching in a classroom being monitored by a trainer or experienced online instructor; or
  • Reviewing recordings of their own performances in a virtual classroom.

Also helpful, the survey found:

  • Peer coaching from colleagues;
  • Reviewing recordings of the instructor’s performance; and
  • Consulting with an instructional designer.

my note: another glaring proof that faculty IS needed in the process.

++++++++++++++
more on synchronous online instruction in this IMS blog

Stacks CMS for libraries

EBSCO Launches Content Management System for Libraries

By Leila Meyer 09/26/16

https://thejournal.com/articles/2016/09/26/ebsco-debuts-content-management-system-for-libraries.aspx

EBSCO Information Services has debuted Stacks, a hosted content management system for libraries, and Stacks Mobile, a native app for iOS and Android devices.

Social media integration, including Goodreads, Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn;

++++++++++++++++

more on technology in libraries in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=library

TurnitIn

We know that many of you have been interested in exploring Turnitin in the past, so we are excited to bring you an exclusive standardized price and more information on the roll out of Feedback Studio, replacing the Turnitin you have previously seen. We would like to share some exciting accessibility updates, how Feedback Studio can help faculty deliver formative feedback to students and help students become writers. Starting today thru December 31st non-integrated Feedback Studio will be $2.50 and integrated Feedback Studio will be $3 for new customers! Confused by the name? Don’t be! Turnitin is new and improved! Check out this video to learn about Feedback Studio!

Meet your exclusive Turnitin Team!

Ariel Ream – Account Executive, Indianapolis aream@turnitin.com – 317.650.2795
Juliessa Rivera – Relationship Manager, Oakland jrivera@iparadigms.com – 510.764.7698

Juan Valladares – Account Representative, Oakland
jvalladares@turnitin.com – 510.764.7552
To learn more, please join us for a WebEx on September 21st. We will be offering free 30 day pilots to anyone who attends!
Turnitin Webinar
Wednesday, September 21, 2016
11:00 am | Central Daylight Time (Chicago) | 1 hr
Meeting number (access code): 632 474 162
https://mnscu.webex.com/mnscu/j.php?MTID=mebaec2ae9d1d25e6774d16717719008d

+++++++++++++++++++

my notes from the webinar

I am prejudiced against TI and I am not hiding it; that does not mean that I am wrong.
For me, TurnitIn (TI) is an anti-pedagogical “surfer,” using the hype of “technology” to ride the wave of overworked faculty, who hope to streamline increasing workload with technology instead of working on pedagogical resolutions of not that new issues.

Low and behold, Juan, the TI presenter is trying to dazzle me with stuff, which does not dazzle me for a long time.
WCAG 2.0 AA standards of the W3C and section 508 of the rehabilitation act.
the sales pitch: 79% of students believe in feedback, but only %50+ receive it. HIs source is TurnitIn surveys from 2012 to 2016 (very very small font size (ashamed of it?))
It seems to me very much like “massaged” data.
Testimonials: one professor and one students. Ha. the apex of qualitative research…

next sales pitch: TurnitIn feedback studio. Not any more the old Classic. It assesses the originality. Drag and drop macro-style notes. Pushing rubrics. but we still fight for rubrics in D2L. If we have a large amount of adjuncts. Ha. another gem. “I know that you are, guys, IT folks.” So the IT folks are the Trojan horse to get the faculty on board. put comments on
This presentation is structured dangerously askew: IT people but no faculty. If faculty is present, they will object that they ARE capable of doing the same which is proposed to be automated.
More , why do i have to pay for another expensive software, if we have paid already Microsoft? MS Word can do everything that has been presented so far. Between MS Word and D2L, it becomes redundant.
why the heck i am interested about middle school and high school.

TI was sued for illegal collection of paper; paper are stored in their database without the consent of the students’ who wrote it. TI goes “great length to protect the identity of the students,” but still collects their work [illegally?}

November 10 – 30 day free trial

otherwise, $3 per student, prompts back: between Google, MS Word and D2L (which we already heftily pay for), why pay another exuberant price.

D2L integration: version, which does not work. LTI.
“small price to pay of such a beauty” – it does not matter how quick and easy the integration is, it is a redundancy, which already can be resolved with existing tools, part of which we are paying hefty price for

https://d2l.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1668/

Play recording (1 hr 4 min 19 sec)
https://mnscu.webex.com/mnscu/ldr.php?RCID=a9b182b4ca8c4d74060f0fd29d6a5b5c

1 2 3 34