Searching for "educational technology"

EDAD 646 tech instruction

EDAD 646 tech instruction with Dr. Roger Worner

Based on the documents attached above, and the discussion and work already surrounding these documents, please consider the following flowchart:

study >>> systems theory >>> cybermetrics >>>

SWOT >>> strategic planning >>> task force >>> architect >>>

CM >>> public adviser >>> public polling >>> referendum

During the exercises surrounding the documents above, you have been introduced to various speakers / practitioners, who presented real-life cases regarding:

  1. business
  2. transportation  https://www.edulog.com/, http://www.tylertech.com/solutions-products/school-solutions/transportation, http://www.busboss.com/
  3. food service (http://www.foodservicedirector.com/research/big-picture/articles/impact-technology-foodservice)
  4. building grounds (http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED499142.pdf)
  5. HR (http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dkeh%26AN%3d89941160%26site%3dehost-live%26scope%3dsite)
  6. others

– the first goal of this technology instruction is to figure out the current state of technology in K12 settings.
assignment:
* split in groups * using each group member’s information and experience about technology in general and technology in school settings, use the flow chart above and identify any known technology, which can improve the process of each step in the flow chart.
* reconvene and compare results among groups. Find similarities and discrepancies and agree on a pool of applicable technology tools and concepts, which can improve the process reflected in the flow chart.

Example how to meet the requirements for the first goal:  1. based on your technological proficiency, how can you aid your study using system thinking/systems approach? the work ahead of you is collaborative. What collaborative tools do you know, which can help the team work across time and space? Skype, Google Hangouts for audio/video/desktopsharing. Google Drive/Docs for working on policies and similar text-based documents.

Work on the following assignment:
Trends in technology cannot be taken separately from other issues and are closely intertwined with other “big” trends :

e.g., mobile workspaces (https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/12/03/mobile-workspaces-on-campus/ ) are part of the larger picture, namely active learning spaces (https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=learning+spaces&submit=Search), which involves, furniture, building construction, etc.

keeping in mind this interdependence / balance, please work in groups on the following questions. Using the available links above and the literature they lead to, as well as your own findings, please provide your best opinion to these questions:

  • when planning for a new building and determining learning spaces, what is the percentage of importance, which we place on technology, in relation to furniture, for example?
  • how much do teachers have a say in the planning of the building, considering that they had worked and prefer “their type” of learning space?
  • who decides what technology and how? how one rationalizes the equation technology = learning spaces = available finances?
  • how much outsourcing (consulting) on any of the components of the equation above one can afford / consider? How much weight the strategic planning puts on the consulting (outsourcing) versus the internal opinion (staff and administrators)?
  • how “far in the future” your strategic plan is willing / able to look at, in terms of technology – learning spaces?

How to stay current with the technology developments:

– the second goal of this technology instruction is to become acquainted with future technological trends and developments.
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/11/25/future-trends-in-education/

 

The New Horizon Report 2015 K12 Edition:
http://k12.wiki.nmc.org/

https://www.graphite.org/ – reviews and ratings for educational materials

ideas:

Are Schools Wasting Moneys on Computers?

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/12/04/computers-in-education/

Educause 2015

Gamify! Play! Learn! Turn Campus Resources into Exciting Learning Experiences

Thursday
Oct 29th, 2015
4:30 PM – 5:20 PM
Eastern Time
Sagamore Ballroom 3
slide 6
  • Gamification is the use of game mechanics and
    game design techniques in non-game contexts.
  • Gamification uses the natural desire for competition, achievement, status, altruism and/or collaboration (depending on the personality type).
slide 8 Gamification Mechanic Types
  • Objectives: A behavioral mechanic type, requiring the user to take action for the reward.
  • Progression: Move the user through the content.
  • Feedback: Informing the user of their status

Gamification Mechanic Benefits       Each gamification mechanic result in one or more benefits.

Gamification Personality Types

People are motivated to play games differently.

Explorers: Pride themselves in exploring all facets of a game or the context surrounding it.

Killers: Driven by player vs player competition. Always comparing themselves to others.

Socializer: Prefers to chat, play cooperatively, and share game experiences with others.

Achievers: Look to achieve all objectives available in a game. Desires to beat the game itself.

==========================

Adaptive Learning in Online Learning: Results from an Ongoing Evaluation

Wednesday
Oct 28th, 2015
11:40 AM – 12:30 PM
Eastern Time
Wabash Ballroom 2
This session will present results from an evaluation of the integration of RealizeIT adaptive learning technology into three fully online courses: General Psychology, Pathophysiology for Nursing Practice, and College Algebra. Presenters will discuss the impact on students, faculty, and the university.

Adaptive learning systems provide each student with a personalized learning experience, adapting the presentation of the content, and possibly the assessment to the individual ability of the student
==============================================

Badges: A New Mode for Faculty Development

Wednesday
Oct 28th, 2015
1:30 PM – 2:30 PM
Eastern Time
Poster Sessions, Exhibit Hall H-K
Co-developed by Learning Technologies and the Faculty Colloquium on Excellence in Teaching and Learning at Indiana University, a digital badge pilot (badges.iu.edu) was launched to support faculty professional development and growth. This session will cover the competency levels, topics of study, and the badging platform to document levels of achievement.
Outcomes: Understand the basics of a three-tiered framework for digital badges * Review the online badging platform * Explore topics for faculty development

=============================

Open Digital Badges: Microcredentials and the Higher Ed Landscape

Wednesday
Oct 28th, 2015
1:30 PM – 2:30 PM
Eastern Time
Poster Sessions, Exhibit Hall H-K
Because they contain claims and evidence and circulate in networks, open digital badges are transforming credentialing. We will highlight the findings from a two-year study of 29 badge development projects, introduce a new project supporting badge innovation in major learning management systems, and interactively discuss the future of badges in higher education.
Outcomes: Understand the open badge ecosystem and how it benefits learning in higher education * Review digital developments in badge delivery * Discover contexts for the future of badges. Daniel Hickeyhttp://www.educause.edu/library/resources/where-badges-work-betterA Framework for Interactivity in Competency-Based Courses: http://er.educause.edu/articles/2015/8/a-framework-for-interactivity-in-competency-based-coursesBadging in a Learner-Centered Context  http://er.educause.edu/multimedia/2015/8/badging-in-a-learner-centered-context



Mozilla Open Badges 101: Digging into Badges (a webinar)

personalized learning or competency-based does not resolve it. GPA does not respond to employers search
regimenting credentials. digital representation of of skill or achievement. represent achievements on the web. social status (foursquare). granular, evidence-based and transferable. badge ecosystem (across multiple areas), this is why open badges; open system. Open Badge Standard: issuer information; earner information; criteria URL; evidence URL; Standards Alignment; Taxonomy Tags

=============================

Data Visualization: The What, the Who, and the How

(overlaps with infographics)
Wednesday
Oct 28th, 2015
2:30 PM – 3:20 PM
Eastern Time
Meeting Room 231-232
Data visualization tools are becoming much stronger and are now targeted at a much wider audience. This panel will explore what we should be trying to do with data visualization, who will be doing it, and how we might support and steer it.
OUTCOMES: Identify multiple opportunities for use of data visualization * Learn about multiple user communities, including those not centrally managed * Explore ways to support users and steer them toward good practiceshttp://www.educause.edu/sites/default/files/library/presentations/E15/SESS029/Data%2BViz%2BEducause%2B151028%2BFINAL1.pptxslides 7: What works well for technically savvy developers may not work for faculty or staff without those same credentials.

  • Data Wrapper
  • Raw
  • Infogram
  • Tableau
    • Oracle suite of OBIEE (Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition) has been very successful for CSU
    • Cognos (IBM) is another tool that is very popular for developers and has been used by USG central office
    • D3 (For Data Driven Documents)
    • Fusion Charts
    • Chart js
    • Google Charts

slide 11: Two primary design goals supported through Data Visualization:

  • Discovery and Exploration

–What story is the data telling you

–Identify patterns and exceptions

  • Decision-making

–Compare, contrast, choose

–Explain, make a point, decide

slide 15:

qTo communicate

qPresent more clearly or more forcefully than would be accomplished with text or tables

qReports, dashboards, infographics, etc.

qTo discover

qAllow us to see what would be difficult or impossible to see if not presented in a useful visualization

qRealm of research but moving into the mainstream

qCan same visualization serve both purposes?

======================

iPad, You Pad, We All Pad: Transforming Teaching and Learning

Wednesday
Oct 28th, 2015
2:30 PM – 3:20 PM
Eastern Time
Meeting Room 237-238
California State University Northridge, Lynn University, and Jackson State University have all deployed one-to-one iPad tablet initiatives, with the objectives to increase student engagement and learning, improve the quality of teaching materials, and decrease student costs. This session will discuss the transformational educational opportunities afforded by the iPad and highlight technology and pedagogical lessons learned.
Outcomes: Learn about the transformational impact of one-to-one iPad initiatives in the classroom * Understand the need for extensive faculty development and faculty adoption strategies * Appreciate deployment and support challenges====================

The Avalon Video and Audio Repository for Libraries and Beyond

Wednesday
Oct 28th, 2015
1:30 PM – 2:30 PM
Eastern Time
Poster Sessions, Exhibit Hall H-K
The Avalon Media System provides an open-source streaming media solution, based on Hydra/Fedora repository technologies, focused on delivery of library media collections, but it is finding other uses, including support for publication, teaching and learning content, and digital scholarship. As a result, new features enhance support for additional research and instructional use cases.
Outcomes: Understand the problems Avalon solves * Understand the extended use cases addressed with Avalon, both present and intended future * Learn how best to engage with the Avalon project.========================

 Karuta: Design Your Own Portfolio Process

Wednesday
Oct 28th, 2015
1:30 PM – 2:30 PM
Eastern Time
Poster Sessions, Exhibit Hall H-K
The Karuta Open Source Portfolio, currently under incubation by the Apereo Foundation, offers dramatic flexibility for designing portfolio workflows with rubrics to assess learning outcomes. Karuta is LTI enabled for integration with the LMS for easy access and transfer of evidence of learning. Subsequent releases will add functionality for showcasing as well as reporting. Outcome: Learn how Karuta can flexibly support your programs and institution through leveraging its functionality
=======================

Supporting the Discovery and Adoption of Open E-Textbooks

Wednesday
Oct 28th, 2015
1:30 PM – 2:30 PM
Eastern Time
Poster Sessions, Exhibit Hall H-K
The California Open Education Resources Council comprises faculty from the three CA higher education systems working together to identify open textbooks for high impact courses. The selected open textbooks are in the process of being peer reviewed and curated in the CA Open Online Library.
Outcomes: Identify quality open textbooks for general education, high-impact courses * Learn how to interpret textbook peer reviews with a faculty-created rubric * Understand how to reference these resources for the discovery of quality no- or low-cost materialshttp://www.educause.edu/sites/default/files/library/presentations/E15/PS58/COOL%2BEducause%2BPoster%2B2015.pdf
====================

Seminar 12P – Six Secrets for Evaluating Online Teaching (separate registration is required)

Tuesday
Oct 27th, 2015
12:30 PM – 4:00 PM
Eastern Time
Meeting Room 241-242
What makes online teaching different from face-to-face teaching? How can we tell when it’s done well? Faculty members, administrators, and IT leaders will learn six evaluation “secrets” from the authors of the new book Evaluating Online Teaching. You will leave this seminar with use-them-now strategies, tools, and templates to take back to your campus.
OUTCOMES: Distinguish online content and practices that “count” as teaching behaviors * Design self-, peer-, and administrative-evaluation analytic tools * Develop a 6-stage, campus-wide program for evaluating online teachinghttp://www.educause.edu/annual-conference/2015/seminar-12p-six-secrets-evaluating-online-teaching-separate-registration-required

10 Handout – Forms and Resources
3 MB, PDF
08 Handout – Ten Principles Operationalized
355 KB, PDF
07 Handout – Checklist for Campus Readiness
140 KB, PDF
06 Handout – Institutional Audit
305 KB, PDF
05 Handout – The Three I’s
188 KB, PDF
04 Handout – Penn State Faculty Online …
87 KB, PDF
00 Workshop Presentation File
12 MB, Powerpoint Slides

========================

Reimagining Learning Space Design across the Disciplines

Thursday
Oct 29th, 2015
8:00 AM – 8:50 AM
Eastern Time
Meeting Room 235-236
Learn how the University of Pittsburgh is creating a scalable classroom model for active learning on a traditional campus. Administrators, faculty, and instructional technologists and designers recently collaborated to reimagine legacy large-enrollment lecture halls. The focus of this session is on the learning space design process across the disciplines.
Outcomes: Identify and apply the principles of active learning associated with learning space deign * Understand the design process * Assemble an effective learning space design teamhttp://www.educause.edu/annual-conference/2015/reimagining-learning-space-design-across-disciplines

==============================

Thinking Digitally: Advancing Digital Literacy with Personalized Learning Tools

Thursday
Oct 29th, 2015
8:00 AM – 8:50 AM
Eastern Time
Wabash Ballroom 2
The session will outline a scalable framework for integrating digital literacy in higher education curriculum, supported by tools that allow for active and personalized learning. Research and examples from Georgia State University’s experience implementing a pilot program will be used as a catalyst for interactive discussion and idea generation.
Outcomes: Understand the value of incorporating digital literacy into curriculum * Select from emerging personalized learning technologies to support digital literacy across diverse academic scenarios * Adapt a methodology for developing partnerships to advance digital literacy across the organizationhttp://www.educause.edu/annual-conference/2015/thinking-digitally-advancing-digital-literacy-personalized-learning-tools===============

What’s That Droning Overhead?

Thursday
Oct 29th, 2015
8:00 AM – 8:50 AM
Eastern Time
Meeting Room 201-202
Session Type: Concurrent Session
A discussion of unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) and drone activities that either take place on campus or impact a campus from the outside. The state of federal aviation regulations and guidelines for drones will be covered. Attendees can share their experiences with official and rogue drone activities at their institutions.
Outcomes: Learn about the drone devices in use, from miniature to massive * Understand the impact of drones on academic institutions, for better or worse * Learn what drone activities are legally allowable, banned, or discouragedhttp://www.educause.edu/annual-conference/2015/whats-droning-overhead

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4vcm8Bg5pkcWFlaQ1J3b3duc2M/view

5. Using small unmanned aerial vehicles  today is similar to the “fair use” of media

http://www.dronesurvivalguide.org

Resources – Higher Ed Drone Policies
The Ohio State University
Iowa State University
Indiana University
University of Kansas
Penn State University
University of New Mexico

The Association of College and University Policy
Administrators (ACUPA, acupa.org)

===================

Mobile Computing

Thursday
Oct 29th, 2015
8:00 AM – 8:50 AM
Eastern Time
Meeting Room 239
Session Type: Discussion Session
Join this lively discussion and discovery of innovative and functional uses and support for mobile computing. We will explore creative ideas for projects using mobile devices in teaching, learning, and administration. Topics may include hardware, applications, tools, special uses, wireless and mobile connectivity, web services, support issues, and security.

big data

big-data-in-education-report

Center for Digital Education (CDE)

real-time impact on curriculum structure, instruction delivery and student learning, permitting change and improvement. It can also provide insight into important trends that affect present and future resource needs.

Big Data: Traditionally described as high-volume, high-velocity and high-variety information.
Learning or Data Analytics: The measurement, collection, analysis and reporting of data about learners and their contexts, for purposes of understanding and optimizing learning and the environments in which it occurs.
Educational Data Mining: The techniques, tools and research designed for automatically extracting meaning from large repositories of data generated by or related to people’s learning activities in educational settings.
Predictive Analytics: Algorithms that help analysts predict behavior or events based on data.
Predictive Modeling: The process of creating, testing and validating a model to best predict the probability of an outcome.

Data analytics, or the measurement, collection, analysis and reporting of data, is driving decisionmaking in many institutions. However, because of the unique nature of each district’s or college’s data needs, many are building their own solutions.

For example, in 2014 the nonprofit company inBloom, Inc., backed by $100 million from the Gates Foundation and the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, closed its doors amid controversy regarding its plan to store, clean and aggregate a range of student information for states and districts and then make the data available to district-approved third parties to develop tools and dashboards so the data could be used by classroom educators.22

Tips for Student Data Privacy

Know the Laws and Regulations
There are many regulations on the books intended to protect student privacy and safety: the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA), the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA), the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)
— as well as state, district and community laws. Because technology changes so rapidly, it is unlikely laws and regulations will keep pace with new data protection needs. Establish a committee to ascertain your institution’s level of understanding of and compliance with these laws, along with additional safeguard measures.
Make a Checklist Your institution’s privacy policies should cover security, user safety, communications, social media, access, identification rules, and intrusion detection and prevention.
Include Experts
To nail down compliance and stave off liability issues, consider tapping those who protect privacy for a living, such as your school attorney, IT professionals and security assessment vendors. Let them review your campus or district technologies as well as devices brought to campus by students, staff and instructors. Finally, a review of your privacy and security policies, terms of use and contract language is a good idea.
Communicate, Communicate, Communicate
Students, staff, faculty and parents all need to know their rights and responsibilities regarding data privacy. Convey your technology plans, policies and requirements and then assess and re-communicate those throughout each year.

“Anything-as-a-Service” or “X-as-a-Service” solutions can help K-12 and higher education institutions cope with big data by offering storage, analytics capabilities and more. These include:
• Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS): Providers offer cloud-based storage, similar to a campus storage area network (SAN)

• Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS): Opens up application platforms — as opposed to the applications themselves — so others can build their own applications
using underlying operating systems, data models and databases; pre-built application components and interfaces

• Software-as-a-Service (SaaS): The hosting of applications in the cloud

• Big-Data-as-a-Service (BDaaS): Mix all the above together, upscale the amount of data involved by an enormous amount and you’ve got BDaaS

Suggestions:

Use accurate data correctly
Define goals and develop metrics
Eliminate silos, integrate data
Remember, intelligence is the goal
Maintain a robust, supportive enterprise infrastructure.
Prioritize student privacy
Develop bullet-proof data governance guidelines
Create a culture of collaboration and sharing, not compliance.

more on big data in this IMS blog:

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=big+data&submit=Search

——–Call for Papers ICEduTech 2015 (last call): submissions until 2 October 2015 ————-

International Conference on Educational Technologies 2015

30 November-2 December 2015, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil

(http://www.icedutech-conf.org/)

* Keynote Speakers (confirmed):

Professor Piet Kommers, University of Twente, The Netherlands

Professor Pedro Isaías, Universidade Aberta (Portuguese Open University), Portugal

* Conference Scope

The Educational Technologies 2015 conference (ICEduTech) is the scientific conference addressing the real topics as seen by teachers, students, parents and school leaders. Both scientists, professionals and institutional leaders are invited to be informed by experts, sharpen the understanding what education needs and how to achieve it.

The conference covers six main areas: Education in Context, Education as Professional Field, Curricular Evolution, Learner Orientation, Integrating Educational Technologies and International Higher Education. These broad areas are divided into more detailed areas, for more information please check http://www.icedutech-conf.org/call-for-papers

* Paper Submission

This is a blind peer-reviewed conference. Authors are invited to submit their papers in English through the conference submission system by October 2, 2015. Submissions must be original and should not have been published previously.

* Important Dates:
– Submission Deadline (last call): 2 October 2015
– Notification to Authors (last call): 26 October 2015
– Final Camera-Ready Submission and Early Registration (last call): Until 6 November 2015
– Late Registration (last call): After 6 November 2015

* Paper Publication
The papers will be published in book and electronic format with ISBN, will be made available through the Digital Library available at http://www.iadisportal.org/digital-library/showsearch.
The conference proceedings will be submitted for indexing to INSPEC, EI Compendex, Thomson ISI, ISTP and other indexing services.

Selected papers of best papers will be extended in order to be included in a Special Issue of JICES (http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/journals.htm?id=jices), entitled “The Impact of Smart Technology on Users and Society”. This journal is indexed by Scopus and other selected indexes.

Extended versions of best papers will also be invited for publication in journals, in an international book and in other selected and indexed publications.

* Conference Contact:
E-mail: secretariat@icedutech-conf.org
Web site: http://www.icedutech-conf.org/

* Organized by: International Association for Development of the Information Society
Co-Organized by: Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina and UNISINOS

 

Enabling BYOD

Enabling Bring Your Own Device

white paper by the Cisco

To help improve understanding of BYOD and its impacts on modern network environments, this white paper will further explore the many differences that exist between corporate and educational approaches to the technology.

In the education space, dealing with non-standard, user-managed devices has been and still remains the norm. Unfortunately, the variety of devices means a multitude of operating systems and software are encountered, with many “standards” being defined. As a result there is little consistency in the device type or the software being installed. Since the device is owned by the student and is a personal resource, it is often difficult or impossible to enforce a policy that prevents users from installing software. In addition, due to the nature of learning as opposed to a corporate environment, it is also difficult to put a restriction on certain classes of software since all may provide a worthwhile educational purpose.

providing a solution that unifies management and deployment polices across both wired and wireless devices is very desirable.

The Internet of Everything (IoE) has spurred a revolution in mobility. Collaboration anywhere, anytime and with any device is quickly becoming the rule instead of the exception. As a result it is now common for students to bring mobile devices such as smartphones, tablets and e-readers into the academic environment to support their educational endeavors.

The infrastructure supporting BYOD no longer has the sole purpose of providing a wireless radio signal within a given area. The focus is now about providing the appropriate bandwidth and quality to accommodate the ever-growing number of devices and ensure that an application provides a good end-user experience. In a sense, applications are now the major driving force behind the continuing evolution of BYOD. For example, a teacher accessing video in the classroom for educational purposes during class hours should have greater priority than a student in the same area accessing a gaming site for recreation.

A state-of-the-art BYOD infrastructure should now be capable of providing more than just generic, general-purpose wireless connectivity. In the classroom environment, the notion of “differentiated access” often resonates with faculty and staff. Once this has been determined, a policy can be applied to the user and their activity on the network.

Granular security can also be intelligently delivered.
Quality of Service (QoS) rate limiting has been available for some time, but now there are newer QoS techniques available.

Location-based services can provide their first interaction with the university. By delivering campus maps and directional information, location-enabled services can enhance the experience of these visitors and provide a positive image to them as well. As a visitor enters a particular building location, information could automatically be provided. In the case of a visiting student, information about the history of a building, departments contained within the building, or other resources could be presented to enhance a guided tour, or provide the perspective student the ability to have a self-directed tour of the campus facilities.

802.11ac Technology (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11ac)

Software Defined Networking (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software-defined_networking)

 

handbook of mobile learning

Routledge. (n.d.). Handbook of Mobile Learning (Hardback) – Routledge [Text]. Retrieved May 27, 2015, from http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415503693/

Crompton, H. (2013). A historical overview of mobile learning: Toward learner-centered education. Retrieved June 2, 2015, from https://www.academia.edu/5601076/A_historical_overview_of_mobile_learning_Toward_learner-centered_education

Crompton, Muilenburg and Berge’s definition for m-learning is “learning across multiple contexts, through social and content interactions, using personal electronic devices.”
The “context”in this definition encompasses m-learnng that is formalself-directed, and spontaneous learning, as well as learning that is context aware and context neutral.
therefore, m-learning can occur inside or outside the classroom, participating in a formal lesson on a mobile device; it can be self-directed, as a person determines his or her own approach to satisfy a learning goal; or spontaneous learning, as a person can use the devices to look up something that has just prompted an interest (Crompton, 2013, p. 83). (Gaming article Tallinn)Constructivist Learnings in the 1980s – Following Piage’s (1929), Brunner’s (1996) and Jonassen’s (1999) educational philosophies, constructivists proffer that knowledge acquisition develops through interactions with the environment. (p. 85). The computer was no longer a conduit for the presentation of information: it was a tool for the active manipulation of that information” (Naismith, Lonsdale, Vavoula, & Sharples, 2004, p. 12)Constructionist Learning in the 1980s – Constructionism differed from constructivism as Papert (1980) posited an additional component to constructivism: students learned best when they were actively involved in constructing social objects. The tutee position. Teaching the computer to perform tasks.Problem-Based learning in the 1990s – In the PBL, students often worked in small groups of five or six to pool knowledge and resources to solve problems. Launched the sociocultural revolution, focusing on learning in out of school contexts and the acquisition of knowledge through social interaction

Socio-Constructivist Learning in the 1990s. SCL believe that social and individual processes are independent in the co-construction of knowledge (Sullivan-Palinscar, 1998; Vygotsky, 1978).

96-97). Keegan (2002) believed that e-learning was distance learning, which has been converted to e-learning through the use of technologies such as the WWW. Which electronic media and tools constituted e-learning: e.g., did it matter if the learning took place through a networked technology, or was it simply learning with an electronic device?

99-100. Traxler (2011) described five ways in which m-learning offers new learning opportunities: 1. Contingent learning, allowing learners to respond and react to the environment and changing experiences; 2. Situated learning, in which learning takes place in the surroundings applicable to the learning; 3. Authentic learning;

Diel, W. (2013). M-Learning as a subfield of open and distance education. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.

  1. 15) Historical context in relation to the field of distance education (embedded librarian)
  2. 16 definition of independent study (workshop on mlearning and distance education
  3. 17. Theory of transactional distance (Moore)

Cochrane, T. (2013). A Summary and Critique of M-Learning Research and Practice. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.
( Galin class, workshop)

P 24

According to Cook and Sharples (2010) the development of M learning research has been characterized by three general faces a focus upon Devices Focus on learning outside the classroom He focus on the mobility of the learner

  1. 25

Baby I am learning studies focus upon content delivery for small screen devices and the PDA capabilities of mobile devices rather than leveraging the potential of mobile devices for collaborative learning as recommended by hope Joyner Mill Road and sharp P. 26 Large scale am learning project Several larger am learning projects have tended to focus on specific groups of learners rather than developing pedagogical strategies for the integration of am mlearning with him tertiary education in general

27

m learning research funding

In comparison am learning research projects in countries with smaller population sizes such as Australia and New Zealand are typiclly funded on a shoe string budget

28

M-learning research methodologies

I am learning research has been predominantly characterized by short term case studies focused upon The implementation of rapidly changing technologies with early adopters but with little evaluation reflection or emphasis on mainstream tertiary-education integration

 

p. 29 identifying the gaps in M learning research

 

lack of explicit underlying pedagogical theory Lack of transferable design frameworks

 

Cochrane, T. (2011).Proceedings ascilite 2011 Hobart:Full Paper 250 mLearning: Why? What? Where? How? http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/hobart11/downloads/papers/Cochrane-full.pdf
(Exploring mobile learning success factors http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ893351.pdf
https://prezi.com/kr94rajmvk9u/mlearning/
https://thomcochrane.wikispaces.com/MLearning+Praxis

Pachler, N., Bachmair, B., and Cook, J. (2013). A Sociocultural Ecological Frame for Mobile Learning. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.
(Tom video studio)

35 a line of argumentation that defines mobile devices such as mobile phones as cultural resources. Mobile cultural resources emerge within what we call a “bile complex‘, which consist of specifics structures, agency and cultural practices.

36 pedagogy looks for learning in the context of identify formation of learners within a wider societal context However at the beginning of the twentieth first century and economy oriented service function of learning driven by targets and international comparisons has started to occupy education systems and schools within them Dunning 2000 describes the lengthy transformation process from natural assets Land unskilled labor to tangible assets machinery to intangible created assets such as knowledge and information of all kinds Araya and Peters 2010 describe the development of the last 20 years in terms of faces from the post industrial economy to d information economy to the digital economy to the knowledge economy to the creative economy Cultural ecology can refer to the debate about natural resources we argue for a critical debate about the new cultural resources namely mobile devices and the services for us the focus must not be on the exploitation of mobile devices and services for learning but instead on the assimilation of learning with mobiles in informal contacts of everyday life into formal education

37

Ecology comes into being is there exists a reciprocity between perceiver and environment translated to M learning processes this means that there is a reciprocity between the mobile devices in the activity context of everyday life and the formal learning

45

Rather than focusing on the acquisition of knowledge in relation to externally defined notions of relevance increasingly in a market-oriented system individual faces the challenge of shape his/her knowledge out of his/her own sense of his/her world information is material which is selected by individuals to be transformed by them into knowledge to solve a problem in the life world

Crompton, H. (2013). A Sociocultural Ecological Frame for Mobile Learning. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.

p. 47 As philosophies and practice move toward learner-centered pedagogies, technology in a parallel move, is now able to provide new affordances to the learner, such as learning that is personalized, contextualized, and unrestricted by temporal and spatial constrains.

The necessity for m-learning to have a theory of its own, describing exactly what makes m-learning unique from conventional, tethered electronic learning and traditional learning.

48 . Definition and devices. Four central constructs. Learning pedagogies, technological devices, context and social interactions.

“learning across multiple contexts, through social and content interactions, using personal electronic devices.”

It is difficult, and ill advisable, to determine specifically which devices should be included in a definition of m-learning, as technologies are constantly being invented or redesigned. (my note against the notion that since D2L is a MnSCU mandated tool, it must be the one and only). One should consider m-learning as the utilization of electronic devices that are easily transported and used anytime and anywhere.

49 e-learning does not have to be networked learning: therefore, e-learnng activities could be used in the classroom setting, as the often are.

Why m-learning needs a different theory beyond e-learning. Conventional e-learning is tethered, in that students are anchored to one place while learning. What sets m-learning apart from conventional e-learning is the very lack of those special and temporal constrains; learning has portability, ubiquitous access and social connectivity.

50 dominant terms for m-learning should include spontaneous, intimate, situated, connected, informal, and personal, whereas conventional e-learning should include the terms computer, multimedia, interactive, hyperlinked, and media-rich environment.

51 Criteria for M-Learning
second consideration is that one must be cognizant of the substantial amount of learning taking place beyond the academic and workplace setting.

52 proposed theories

Activity theory: Vygotsky and Engestroem

Conversation theory: Pask 1975, cybernetic and dialectic framework for how knowledge is constructed. Laurillard (2007) although conversation is common for all forms of learning, m-learning can build in more opportunities for students to have ownership and control over what they are learning through digitally facilitated, location-specific activities.

53 multiple theories;

54 Context is central construct of mobile learning. Traxler (2011) described the role of context in m-learning as “context in the wider context”, as the notion of context becomes progressively richer. This theme fits with Nasimith et al situated theory, which describes the m-learning activities promoting authentic context and culture.

55. Connectivity
unlike e-learning, the learner is not anchored to a set place. it links to Vygotsky’s sociocultural approach.
Learning happens within various social groups and locations, providing a diverse range of connected  learning experiences. furthermore, connectivity is without temporal restraints, such as the schedules of educators.

55. Time
m-larning as “learning dispersed in time”

55. personalization
my note student-centered learning

Moura, A., Carvalho, A. (2013). Framework For Mobile Learning Integration Into Educational Contexts. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.

p. 58 framework is based on constructivist approach, Activity theory, and the attention, relevance and confidence satisfaction (ARCS) model http://www.arcsmodel.com/#!
http://torreytrust.com/images/ITH_Trust.pdf

to set a didacticmodel that can be applied to m-learning requires looking at the characteristics of specific devi

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Nadire_Cavus/publication/235912545_Basic_elements_and_characteristics_of_mobile_learning/links/02e7e526c1c0647142000000.pdf
https://eleed.campussource.de/archive/9/3704

education reform

How to reform education

two articles in the New York Times, which are relevant to SCSU and LRS

What to Learn in College to Stay One Step Ahead of Computers

http://nyti.ms/1ekXOyu

  • Two strains of thought seem to dominate the effort to deal with this problem. The first is that we teachers should define and provide to our students a certain kind of general, flexible, insight-bearing human learning that, we hope, cannot be by computers. The second is that we need to make education more business replaced-oriented, teaching about the real world and enabling a creative entrepreneurial process that, presumably, computers cannot duplicate. These two ideas are not necessarily in conflict.
  • Richard J. Murnane and Frank Levy in their book “The New Division of Labor”
  • the study certainly suggests that a college education needs to be broad and general, and not defined primarily by the traditional structure of separate departments staffed by professors
  • The developing redefinition of higher education should provide benefits that will continue for decades into the future. We will have to adapt as information technology advances. At the same time, we must continually re-evaluate what is inherently different between human and computer learning, and what is practical and useful to students for the long haul. And we will have to face the reality that the “art of living in the world” requires at least some elements of a business education.

Why More Education Won’t Fix Economic Inequality

http://nyti.ms/1ywwOzI

  • strengthening education so that more Americans can benefit from the advances of the 21st-century economy. This is a solution that conservatives, centrists and liberals alike can comfortably get behind.
  • Brad Hershbein, Melissa Kearney and Lawrence Summers o
  • Hamilton Project, a centrist research group operating with Wall Street funding and seeking to find third-way-style solutions to America’s problems that can unite left and right.
  • “Increasing the educational attainment of men without a college degree will increase their average earnings and their likelihood of being employed,” the authors write.
  • In other words, it’s worth pursuing more and better education for working-class Americans on its own terms, because it will improve their lives and economic potential. Inequality, meanwhile, is a deeper problem, and its potential solutions remain ideologically divisive.

Instructional Design

7 Things You Should Know About Developments in Instructional Design

http://www.educause.edu/library/resources/7-things-you-should-know-about-developments-instructional-design

Please read the entire EducCause article here: eli7120

discussion of IMS with faculty:

  • pedagogical theories
  • learning outcome
  • design activities
  • students’ multimedia assignments, which lead to online resources
  • collaboration with other departments for the students projects
  • moving the class to online environment (even if kept hybrid)

What is it?

the complexity of the learning environment is turning instructional design into a more dynamic activity, responding to changing educational models and expectations. Flipped classrooms, makerspaces, and competency-based learning are changing how instructors work with students, how students work with course content, and how mastery is verified. Mobile computing, cloud computing, and data-rich repositories have altered ideas about where and how learning takes place.

How does it work?

One consequence of these changes is that designers can find themselves filling a variety of roles. Today’s instructional designer might work with subject-matter experts, coders, graphic designers, and others. Moreover, the work of an instructional designer increasingly continues throughout the duration of a course rather than taking place upfront.

Who’s doing it?

The responsibility for designing instruction traditionally fell to the instructor of a course, and in many cases it continues to do so. Given the expanding role and landscape of technology—as well as the growing body of knowledge about learning and about educational activities and assessments— dedicated instructional designers are increasingly common and often take a stronger role.

Why is it significant?

The focus on student-centered learning, for example, has spurred the creation of complex integrated learning environments that comprise multiple instructional modules. Competency-based learning allows students to progress at their own pace and finish assignments, courses, and degree plans as time and skills permit. Data provided by analytics systems can help instructional designers predict which pedagogical approaches might be most effective and tailor learning experiences accordingly. The use of mobile learning continues to grow, enabling new kinds of learning experiences.

What are the downsides?

Given the range of competencies needed for the position, finding and hiring instructional designers who fit well into particular institutional cultures can be challenging to the extent that instructors hand over greater amounts of the design process to instructional designers, some of those instructors will feel that they are giving up control, which, in some cases, might appear to be simply the latest threat to faculty authority and autonomy. My note: and this is why SCSU Academic Technology is lead by faculty not IT staff. 

Where is it going?

In some contexts, instructional designers might work more directly with students, teaching them lifelong learning skills. Students might begin coursework by choosing from a menu of options, creating their own path through content, making choices about learning options, being more hands-on, and selecting best approaches for demonstrating mastery. Educational models that feature adaptive and personalized learning will increasingly be a focus of instructional design. My note: SCSU CETL does not understand instructional design tendencies AT ALL. Instead of grooming faculty to assume the the leadership role and fill out the demand for instructional design, it isolates and downgrades (keeping traditional and old-fashioned) instructional design to basic tasks of technicalities done by IT staff.

What are the implications for teaching and learning?

By helping align educational activities with a growing understanding of the conditions,
tools, and techniques that enable better learning, instructional designers can help higher education take full advantage of new and emerging models of education. Instructional
designers bring a cross-disciplinary approach to their work, showing faculty how learning activities used in particular subject areas might be effective in others. In this way, instructional
designers can cultivate a measure of consistency across courses and disciplines in how educational strategies and techniques are incorporated. Designers can also facilitate the
creation of inclusive learning environments that offer choices to students with varying strengths and preferences.

More on instructional design in this IMS blog:

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/10/13/instructional-design/

LMS as a concept under scrutiny

A Blend-Online listserv thread regarding the choice of LMS and the future of LMS

Schoology HEd – Digital Learning Ecosystem (March 2015) (PDF document)

From: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Robert Tousignant
Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2015 1:41 PM
To: BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Faculty Involvement in LMS Selection

I’ve been reviewing this thread and thought I’d introduce a new player… Schoology is getting the attention of the analyst community and gobbling up the SIIA Codie awards for best learning platform the last couple of years.  (Please note, I am not an impartial observer and I do a horse in the race)

The attached document includes information that will explain a new paradigm for evaluating an LMS that we see being adopted more and more  – a move from a focus on utility (features and functions) to one focused standards, interoperability and the user experience (UI/UX).

Feel free to reach out directly if I can be of assistance.

Robert Tousignant

Sr. Director

Schoology Higher Education

O:  (212)213-8333 x69

M: (617)838-1366

rtousignant@schoology.com

Colorado State University’s Global Campus Announces Strategic Partnership with Schoology

From: Edward Garay <garay@UIC.EDU>
Reply-To: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv <BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Date: Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 2:27 PM
To: BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU” <BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Faculty Involvement in LMS Selection

These days, I tend to favor LMS Review/Selection initiatives that take one to two years to complete, but as always, it depends on the institution, its readiness to spec the needs of their faculty/students and evaluate viable options, as well as the campus resources available to nurture a possible smooth LMS platform transition. I like pointing out to the well-executed recent LMS selection initiatives carried out by UCF, Northwestern, Indiana, Harvard and Dartmouth, although there are many others.

I am also fond of Educause Review 2014 article on Selecting a Learning Management System: Advice from an Academic Perspective available at http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/selecting-learning-management-system-advice-academic-perspective

 


— Ed Garay
University of Illinois at Chicago
UIC School of Public Health
http://www.twitter.com/garay

*** Attend the FACULTY SUMMER INSTITUTE :: Wed-Fri May 27-29 at Urbana-Champaign
#pedagogy #BlendedLearning #classroom #teaching #OnlineLearning #EdTech
http://go.illinois.edu/facultysummerinstitute

 

_____________________________
From: Hap Aziz <hapaziz@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2015 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Faculty Involvement in LMS Selection
To: <blend-online@listserv.educause.edu>
That’s sounds like a similar timeframe to what we had at UB when we moved from Blackboard to Canvas. While LTI didn’t not play a large role in the decision-making process as we changed our LMS, it is now a central consideration as we look to acquire any new app functionality for our learning environment.

 

I’m setting up an area in the IMS forum area for LTI policy discussion. I’ll share that location with the group shortly so we can take some of the in-the-weeds discussion offline here.

 

Hap Aziz

Associate Vice President

University of Bridgeport

http://bridgeport.edu

 

Connected Learning Innovation Community

IMS Global Learning Consortium

http://imsglobal.org

 

On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Sam Bachert <BachertS@sanjuancollege.edu> wrote:

Hap,

 

The selection process started in January of 2013 and the task force voted at the end of May of 2013 unanimously for Canvas so about 5 months.  By October we started training faculty in preparation for the Spring 2014 semester what was amazing about our transition to Canvas was that we had everyone moved out of ANGEL by start of Summer 14 so we only had 1 semester where we were supporting both ANGEL and Canvas.  The use of LTI integrations and Canvas makes our jobs a lot easier to support the various tools that faculty are adopting for their classes – it also makes it a lot easier for faculty to integrate other technologies and keep them in the LMS or have single sign on so it is more seamless for students.

 

Thanks, Sam

 

Samuel R. Bachert

Manager, Online Services

 

ellucian®

San Juan College

4601 College Boulevard

Farmington, NM 87402

Voice: 505.566.3310 Mobile: 505.609.0573 Fax: 505.566.3570

bacherts@sanjuancollege.edu * samuel.bachert@ellucian.com

http://www.ellucian.com

Follow us:

CONFIDENTIALITY: This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information, and unauthorized disclosure or use is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email from your system. Thank you.

From: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Hap Aziz
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 7:09 PM
To: BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Faculty Involvement in LMS Selection

Hey, Sam, long time no see! Do you know about how long your whole selection process took? Also, does LTI conformance make your job with academic technology more straightforward to deal with?

Hap Aziz

Associate Vice President

University of Bridgeport

http://bridgeport.edu

Connected Learning Innovation Community

IMS Global Learning Consortium

http://imsglobal.org

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Sam Bachert <BachertS@sanjuancollege.edu> wrote:

JeJe,

I am at San Juan College and we also recently went through the selection process for a new LMS and like others who have commented switched to Canvas (from ANGEL).  We ended up with a selection team that was primarily faculty, a couple students, and a handful of technology staff that reviewed the various LMSs and then made our final decision.  If you would like I can get you the contact information for the faculty who assisted on the selection team.

Thanks,

Sam

Samuel R. Bachert

Director of Academic Technology

ellucian®

San Juan College

4601 College Boulevard

Farmington, NM 87402

Voice: 505.566.3310 Mobile: 505.609.0573 Fax: 505.566.3570

bacherts@sanjuancollege.edu * samuel.bachert@ellucian.com

http://www.ellucian.com

Follow us:

CONFIDENTIALITY: This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information, and unauthorized disclosure or use is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email from your system. Thank you.

From: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Noval, JeJe (LLU)
Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2015 9:25 PM
To: BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [BLEND-ONLINE] Faculty Involvement in LMS Selection

 

Hello Colleagues,

Were any of you, faculty members, involved in the learning management selection process of your educational institution?  If so, would it be possible to interview you in the future for a research study?

Best,

JeJe Noval, MS, RD
Assistant Professor
Loma Linda University

 

differences between classroom, blended, online and open learning

10 key takeaways about differences between classroom, blended, online and open learning

http://www.tonybates.ca/2015/02/21/10-key-takeaways-about-differences-between-classroom-blended-online-and-open-learning/

Tony Bates shares his thoughts on the difference

differences between classroom, blended, online and open learning

Chapter 10 of Tony Bates online open textbook, Teaching in a Digital Age:

– See more at: http://www.tonybates.ca/2015/02/21/10-key-takeaways-about-differences-between-classroom-blended-online-and-open-learning/#sthash.MOymkn9F.dpuf

More on F2F, blended/hybrid and online learning in this blog:

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=blended

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=hybrid

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=online+learning

1 23 24 25 26 27