Searching for "pedagogy"

educause 2015

8:00 AM11:30 AM

Meeting Room 231-232
Session Type: Morning Seminar
Meeting Room 140-141
Session Type: Afternoon Seminar
Meeting Room 241-242
Session Type: Afternoon Seminar
Sagamore Ballroom 6
Meeting Room 132-133
Session Type: Discussion Session
Sagamore Ballroom 4
Poster Sessions, Exhibit Hall H-K
Session Type: Poster Session
Poster Sessions, Exhibit Hall H-K
Shoji Kajita
Session Type: Poster Session
Poster Sessions, Exhibit Hall H-K
Session Type: Poster Session
Poster Sessions, Exhibit Hall H-K
Leslie Kennedy
Session Type: Poster Session
Poster Sessions, Exhibit Hall H-K
Jon W. Dunn
Session Type: Poster Session
Sagamore Ballroom 4
Rob Peregoodoff
Meeting Room 237-238
Session Type: Concurrent Session
Meeting Room 231-232
Session Type: Concurrent Session
Meeting Room 132-133
Session Type: Discussion Session
Meeting Room 203-204
Wabash Ballroom 2
Session Type: Concurrent Session
Meeting Room 201-202
David Stack
Session Type: Concurrent Session
Meeting Room 239
Rose A. Rocchio
Session Type: Discussion Session
Sagamore Ballroom 5
Jaime Casap
Session Type: Featured Session
Meeting Room 201-202
Session Type: Concurrent Session
Meeting Room 203-204
Meeting Room 134-135
Tanya Joosten
Session Type: Discussion Session
Meeting Room 237-238
Session Type: Concurrent Session

digital story telling bibliography

digital storytelling across the curriculum
Alexander, B. (2011). New Digital Storytelling, The: Creating Narratives with New Media: Creating Narratives with New Media. ABC-CLIO.  https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=kwi2WavppOUC&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=digital+storytelling+across+the+curriculum&ots=KEKrtJEtKD&sig=JyUwssk6MC-R8zhO9JJOAPiggtA
Bernard, R. (2015). The effective uses of digital storytelling as a teaching and learning tool. In: Flood, J., Heath, S. B., & Lapp, D. (Eds). Handbook of Research on Teaching Literacy Through the Communicative and Visual Arts, Volume II: A Project of the International Reading Association. Routledge.
https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=cIx4CAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA429&dq=digital+storytelling+across+the+curriculum&ots=KpqFoWGQmm&sig=ZQJZkqfn_uE-2L4tqpBmVEiafXo#v=onepage&q=digital%20storytelling%20across%20the%20curriculum&f=false

Sessoms, D. (2008). DIGITAL STORYTELLING: Training Pre-service Teachers to Use Digital Storytelling Across the Curriculum. In K. McFerrin, R. Weber, R. Carlsen & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2008 (pp. 958-960). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). http://www.editlib.org/p/27300/

Yuksel, P., Robin, B. & McNeil, S. (2011). Educational Uses of Digital Storytelling all around the World. In M. Koehler & P. Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2011 (pp. 1264-1271). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). http://www.editlib.org/p/36461/

Ohler, J. (2008). Digital storytelling in the classroom : new media pathways to literacy, learning, and creativity /. Corwin Press.
Rudnicki, A., Cozart, A., Ganesh, A., Markello, C., Marsh, S., McNeil, S., Mullins, H., Odle Smith, D. & Robin, B. (2006). The Buzz Continues…The Diffusion of Digital Storytelling across disciplines and colleges at the University of Houston. In C. Crawford, R. Carlsen, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2006 (pp. 717-723). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). http://www.editlib.org/p/22130/
Sadik, A. (2008). Digital storytelling: a meaningful technology-integrated approach for engaged student learning. Educational Technology Research And Development, (4), 487. http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedsgao%26AN%3dedsgcl.180436947%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite
Dreon, O., Kerper, R. M., & Landis, J. (2011). Digital Storytelling: A Tool for Teaching and Learning in the YouTube Generation. Middle School Journal, (5). 4. http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedsjsr%26AN%3dedsjsr.23047749%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite
Benmayor, R. ). (2008). Digital storytelling as a signature pedagogy for the new humanities. Arts And Humanities In Higher Education, 7(2), 188-204. doi:10.1177/1474022208088648 http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedselc%26AN%3dedselc.2-52.0-57349109150%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite
Churchill, N., Ping, L. C., Oakley, G., & Churchill, D. (2008). DIGITAL STORYTELLING AND DIGITAL LITERACY LEARNING. In Rea dings in Education and Technology: Proceedings of ICICTE 200http://www.icicte.org/ICICTE2008Proceedings/churchill043.pdf
Digital Storytelling and Philosophy | Sociology | Anthropology | History classes:
Oppermann, M. (2008). Digital Storytelling and American Studies Critical trajectories from the emotional to the epistemological. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 7(2), 171–187. http://doi.org/10.1177/1474022208088647 http://ahh.sagepub.com/content/7/2/171.short
Burgess, J. (2006). Hearing Ordinary Voices: Cultural Studies, Vernacular Creativity and Digital Storytelling. Continuum, 20(2), 201–214. http://doi.org/10.1080/10304310600641737 http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10304310600641737?journalCode=ccon20
Gubrium, A., & Turner, K. C. N. (n.d.). Digital Storytelling as an Emergent Method  for Social Research and Practice. Retrieved October 22, 2015, from http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1007&context=aline_gubrium https://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=20&q=digital+storytelling+in+philosophy+classes&hl=en&as_sdt=0,24&as_vis=1
Williams, J. B., Bedi, K., & Goldberg, M. A. (2006). The Impact of Digital Storytelling on Social Agency: Early Experience at an Online University (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 1606104). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1606104 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1606104
Nilsson, M. (2010). Seminar – Developing Voice in Digital Storytelling Through Creativity, Narrative and Multimodality. Retrieved October 22, 2015, from http://seminar.net/index.php/reviews-hovedmeny-110/75-current-issue/154-developing-voice-in-digital-storytelling-through-creativity-narrative-and-multimodality 
Tatum, M. (2009). Digital Storytelling as a Cultural-Historical Activity:  Effects on Information Text Comprehension. Open Access Dissertations. Retrieved from http://scholarlyrepository.miami.edu/oa_dissertations/222
Digital Storytelling and Education:
IVala, E., Chigona, A., Gachago, D., & Condy, J. (2012). Digital Storytelling and Student Engagement: A Case of Pre-Service Student Teachers and their Lecturers’ at a University of Technology – ProQuest. Presented at the International Conference on e-Learning. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/openview/498ddf3873e0433dd9ef1b0a67c1d9a9/1?pq-origsite=gscholar
Digital Storytelling and Communication Studies | Mass Communication:
Tharp, K., & Hills, L. (2004).  Digital Storytelling: Culture, Media and Community. In: Marshall, S., Taylor, W., & Yu, X. H. (Eds). Using Community Informatics to Transform Regions. Idea Group Inc (IGI).
Raimist, R., Doerr-Stevens, C., & Jacobs, W. (2010). Seminar – The Pedagogy of Digital Storytelling in the College Classroom. International Journal of Media, Technology & Lifelong Learning, 6(2). Retrieved from http://seminar.net/volume-6-issue-2-2010/145-the-pedagogy-of-digital-storytelling-in-the-college-classroom
Boa-Ventura, A., & Rodrigues, I. (2010). “Making news with digital stories: digital storytelling as a forma of citizen journalism – case Studies analysis in the U.S., UK and Portugal. Revista PRISMA.COM, 0(7). Retrieved from http://revistas.ua.pt/index.php/prismacom/article/view/674

MC218 remodel

According to the Team 5 meeting notes of 9/22/2015, presented to the library administration, under individual updates, e. Pedagogy, Active Learning/Interactivity/Focused Engagement, there are six points, including ‘flipped classroom,’ as proposed by Chris Inkster, but nothing about my proposal, which can be outlined as “changing the pedagogy of library instruction to fit the increased environment of mobile devices.” It makes the absence of my proposal even more bizarre considering that:

– during a meeting of Team 5 on Sept 23, I was questioned about my proposal and i delivered renewed explainations

– the webinar ONLINE GENERATION IS TRANSFORMING LIBRARIES: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/09/22/online-generation-is-transforming-libraries/, as referred by Chris Inkster, is discussing exactly the need of pedagogical changes proposed by me.

Thus, since past proposals submitted by me were cut/ignored in a similar fashion as well as this one, I am formally entering it in a medium, which will bear the time stamp and the seal, so my proposal is not bastardized in the future and everyone can refer to the original idea, shall misunderstandings occur.

 

From: Miltenoff, Plamen
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 5:33 PM
To: Inkster, Christine D. <cinkster@stcloudstate.edu>; Gruwell, Cindy A. <cagruwell@stcloudstate.edu>; Gorman, Michael S. <msgorman@stcloudstate.edu>; Hubbs, Susan <shubbs@stcloudstate.edu>
Subject: Miller Center 218 – Remodel – TWO Questions

Good evening,

I will pick up from the correspondence below and share my thoughts thereafter.

 

  1. Several weeks ago, Cisco announced a technology, which will allow the institutional IT to assign preference of teaching content over personal usage. In my understanding, the news signals that questions about accessibility need to be accordingly rephrased. It also craves transparency on the SCSU IT.
  2. I have difficulties following Henry May’s ideas because of: 1. Lack of transparency and 2. Lack of didactical understanding.

 

The quintessential disparity (cart in front of the ox) is that from the emails below, it seems that the technology is driving didactic. If I need to prove that pedagogy drives technology, not vice versa, then there is a profound problem. I will assume that everyone agrees with pedagogy being in the center and technology is serving it. In that sense, this team and any other faculty unit trying to line up their curricular process to Henry’s vision, becomes preposterous; Henry is the one who has to be listening to the faculty and serve them.

 

Therefore, trying to adjust [long-term]future plans about pedagogy, by asking technology questions first, is in its best limiting. One needs to come up with a didactic frame and ask the responding questions how to furbish such frame with technology. If one assumes, as it is claimed, that this campus is moving to m-learning (mobile learning), BYOD, BYOx or any other fancy acronym, which de facto reflects the preponderance of mobile devices as main gateway to information used by students, then the pedagogy must be [re]designed for m-learning. In that sense, from a pedagogical point of view, I find perplexing focusing on MC 218 and subduing BYOD/x/mobile learning to the pedagogy, which will be exercised in a room ( MC 218). How is it mobile? Using mobile devices in room full with desktops does not make sense to me. Keep teaching a dynamic content such as library instruction in a confined room, also does not make sense to me.

 

Here is how I see the pedagogical reconsideration of library instruction must be considered.

In April 214, I proposed a plan, adopted from a Chicago librarian:

http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/bi/

the plan reflects one of numerous possibilities to change the pedagogy of lecturing in a room (MC 218) to hands-on, real-life construct of knowledge by students on their own (constructivism). The pedagogical foundation is based on the use of personal mobile devices (BYOx), which renders the issue of MC 218 accessibility by wi fi as non-significant, since the hit on the wi fi network will be evenly distributed across the entire building.

The example above is only one of many on curriculum that needs to be changed by adopting gaming and gamification techniques:

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/03/19/recommendations-for-games-and-gaming-at-lrs/

the essence of library instruction needs to change from lecturing to facilitation and consultations of students’ own construct and discovery how the library works and can help them; it needs to be a F2F rehearsal of students-librarian virtual relationship, which later on can guide and help students individually then in groups.

 

In that sense, MC 218 can/should to be considered a hub for activities, which mostly take place across the library. MC 218 can be the center place, where in-depth exercises are performed. Exercises, which require either:  1. Stronger processing power, 2. Intensive typing, or 3. Larger screens. While it needs to be further surveyed, I believe that MC 218 needs to have prevalent presence of dock-type of stations (recharge, dongles to  connect to large screens) and other peripherals which can allow students to connect their laptops, tablets and mobile devices, then desktops.

 

Thank you.

Plamen

 

 

 

social media and critical thinking

Does social media make room for critical thinking?

social media critical thinking

social media critical thinking

Sinprakob, S., & Songkram, N. (2015). A Proposed Model of Problem-based Learning on Social Media in Cooperation with Searching Technique to Enhance Critical Thinking of Undergraduate Students. Procedia – Social And Behavioral Sciences, 174(International Conference on New Horizons in Education, INTE 2014, 25-27 June 2014, Paris, France), 2027-2030. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.871
http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedselp%26AN%3dS1877042815009234%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite

Bailey, A. (2014). Teaching Alice Walker’s The Color Purple: Using Technology and Social Media To Foster Critical Thinking and Reflection. Virginia English Journal, 64(1), 17.
http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedo%26AN%3d98060385%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite

Eales-Reynolds, L., Gillham, D., Grech, C., Clarke, C., & Cornell, J. (2012). A study of the development of critical thinking skills using an innovative web 2.0 tool. Nurse Education Today, 32(7), 752-756. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2012.05.017

Baldino, S. (2014). The Classroom Blog: Enhancing Critical Thinking, Substantive Discussion, and Appropriate Online Interaction. Voices From The Middle, 22(2), 29.
http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedo%26AN%3d99913218%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite

Ravenscroft, A., Warburton, S., Hatzipanagos, S., & Conole, G. (2012). Designing and evaluating social media for learning: shaping social networking into social learning?. Journal Of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(3), 177-182. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00484.x
http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dkeh%26AN%3d75254126%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite

finding ways to capture meaningful informal learning experiences by explicitly linking these to formal structures, and providing frameworks within which informal learning can then be validated and accredited (Cedefop Report 2007).

Education is clearly a social process but it is probably much closer to an ongoing discussion or debate than an extended celebration with an ever-expanding network of friends (p. 179, Ravenscroft et al.)

the community of inquiry (COI) model developed by Garrison and Anderson (2003) and social network analysis (SNA). European Commission-funded integrated

project called MATURE (Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks), which is investigating how technology-mediated informal learning leads to improved knowledge practices in the digital workplace
Fitzgibbons, M. (2014). Teaching political science students to find and evaluate information in the social media flow. In I. Management Association, STEM education: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. Retrieved from http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/igistem/teaching_political_science_students_to_find_and_evaluate_information_in_the_social_media_flow/0
Cheung, C. (2010). Web 2.0: Challenges and Opportunities for Media Education and Beyond. E-Learning And Digital Media, 7(4), 328-337. http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3deric%26AN%3dEJ916502%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite
Pattison, D. (2012). Participating in the Online Social Culture. Knowledge Quest, 41(1), 70-72. http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dkeh%26AN%3d79921213%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite
Key to using social media is the ability to stand back and evaluate the credibility of a source of information, apart from the actual content. While developing this critical attitude toward traditional media is important, the attitude is even more crucial in the context of using social media because information didn’t go through the vetting process of formal publication. Can the student corroborate the information from multiple sources? How recent is this information? Are the author’s credentials appropriate? In other words, the ability to step back, to become aware of the metatext or metacontext is more important than ever.
Coad, D. T. (2013). Developing Critical Literacy and Critical Thinking through Facebook. Kairos: A Journal Of Rhetoric, Technology, And Pedagogy, 18(1).
http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/praxis/tiki-index.php?page=Developing_Critical_Literacy_and_Critical_Thinking_through_Facebook
Many instructors believe that writing on social networking sites undermines the rhetorical skills students learn in class because of the slang and abbreviations often used on these sites; such instructors may believe that social networks are the end of students’ critical awareness when they communicate. Johndan Johnson-Eilola and Stuart A. Selber (2009) contended that electronic writing forms actually require “sophisticated skills of understanding concrete rhetorical situations, analyzing audiences (and their goals and inclinations), and constructing concise, information-laden texts, as a part of a dynamic, unfolding, social process” (p. 18). It is this dynamic process that makes social networking a perfect match for the composition classroom and for teaching rhetorical skills: It helps students see how communication works in real, live rhetorical situations. Many students do not believe that communication in these media requires any kind of valuable literacy skills because they buy into the myth of how the news media portray social networks as valueless forms of communication that are decaying young people’s minds. This is why I introduced students to the passage from Invisible Man: to get them thinking about what kinds of skills they learn on Facebook. I found the text useful for helping them acknowledge the skills they are building in these writing spaces.
Stuart A. Selber (2004) in Multiliteracies for a Digital Age criticized so-called computer literacy classes for having “focused primarily on data representations, numbering systems, operating systems, file formats, and hardware and software components” rather than on the task of teaching students to be “informed questioners of technology” (p. 74). In a time when, as Sheelah M. Sweeny (2010) noted, “the ability to stay connected with others is constant,” it is increasingly important to engage composition students in critical thinking about the spaces they write in (p. 121). It is becoming clearer, as technology giants such as Google® and Apple® introduce new technologies, that critical literacy and critical thinking about technology are necessary for our students’ futures.
Valentini, C. (2015). Is using social media “good” for the public relations profession? A critical reflection. Public Relations Review, 41(2), 170-177. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.11.009
http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dkeh%26AN%3d108299204%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363811114001817
p. 172 there is no doubt that digital technologies and social media have contributed to a major alteration in people’s interpersonal communications and relational practices. Inter- personal communications have substantially altered, at least in Western and developed countries, as a result of the culture of increased connectivity that has emerged from social media’s engineering sociality ( van Dijck, 2013 ), which allows anyone to be online and to connect to others. Physical presence is no longer a precondition for interpersonal communication.
(Jiping) The Pew Research Center ( Smith & Duggan, 2013 , October 21) indicates that one in every ten American adults has used an online dating site or mobile dating app to seek a partner, and that in the last eight years the proportion of Americans who say that they met their current partner online has doubled. Another study conducted by the same organization ( Lenhart & Duggan, 2014 , February 11) shows that 25% of married or partnered adults who text, have texted their partner while they were both home together, that 21% of cell-phone owners or internet users in a committed relationship have felt closer to their spouse or partner because of exchanges they had online or via text message. Another 9% of adults have resolved online or by text message an argument with their partner that they were having difficulty resolving person to person ( Lenhart & Duggan, 2014 , February 11). These results indicate that digital technologies are not simply tools that facilitate communications: they have a substantial impact on the way humans interact and relate to one another. In other words, they affect the dynamics of interpersonal relations

MN eSummit 2015

#MNsummit2015

Main speaker

Aaron Doering

aaron doening

aaron doening

Engagement not completion

Design experience not product

Create change, not simply respond to it

He was a geography teacher : Dimitrina

Experience explore expand. Adventure based how to collaborate in ways we have not collaborated before pedagogical guidelines internet driven

Instructor – content – design

Today: first think is design, content, instructor. So how do we design learning environments is the most important one

Guide learners as designers. Constructivism. Design for meaning. Through the power of the story.

Geotetic  design a learning environment learn geography using GIS

Situated movies (student-centered learning)

Grant Earthducation go to the most remote parts of the world to align their education with their culture, instead of what the government is downing as culture

Use of phone: whoever answers instructor’s question first, gets to pose the next question to the rest of the audience.

Design based research

Self-narrative, referencing the experience real world issues in real time

  1. reference knowledge . knowledge overlap. Technological pedagogical content knowledge.

Geotetic not only how prepare teachers, but desing learning environmwer of the story.

we explore: https://www.we-explore.com/

9.5 design as a learner.

the U Media Lab.
The Changing Earth. App GoX (instagram on steroids.  tell their story through the app). How is this different from Google Earth
Raptor Lab (rehabilitate a raptor).

  1. design experiences
  2. build trust
  3. guide learners as designers
  4. recognize learners as experts
  5. encourage collaboration
  6. inspire self narrative
  7. reference the knowledge domains
  8. teach for change
  9. design as learner

adoering@umn.edi     chasingseals.com   @chasingseals

 

podcast pontification (audio version of blog self reflections)

 Greg Steinke The U
A Digital Story Assignment using WeVideo

wevideo

WeVideo is the Google response to iMovie cloud

The U is on Google email and thus google drive and all other google tools

The Center for Digital Storytelling. short videos, 3-5 min incorporate photographs with the author narration, reflection

Assignment (verbal directions). process (write a 2 page script, every page is about a minute of video), gather images that support the story; edit the script (rewrite); record audio to the script (use an app on the phone instead of WeVideo), WeVideo can edit the audio recording; edit the story, edit the photos to match the story; YourTube and/or Google+

working with faculty: is the digital story a good fit for your course? two questions: does the course have many writing assignments? does everyone have to do the same type of assignment? do you want to offer choices? do you want your students to share their work outside of the class? to you want to explore opportunities for students to develop 21 century skills?

google communities for sharing

wewideo has a tutorial at Center for Digital Storytelling

students can use the digital story for their eportfolio

the entire exercise is entirely based on mobile devices

time frame: scaffolding options

3d printing products were the tangible result of the project and the digital storytelling just the format to present

Google Drive master folder for the phone images and video; iOS apps: MoviePro, FiLMc Pro, VoiceRecord Pro (including mp3); Android: WeVideo

Storyboard template

Faculty Development Programs: Digital Storytelling Community of Practice

http://it.umn.edu/faculty-development-programs-digital-0

Poster sessions:

Brad Hokanson

http://dha.design.umn.edu/faculty/BHokanson.html

iPAD video kit:

ipad video kit

Laurie Conzemius
Critical Thinking

laurie

ISTE: http://conference.iste.org/2016/
Joe Lau critical thinking

apps: Popplet  blog.popplet.com  http://www.popplet.com/ (mindmapping)

into the book: http://reading.ecb.org/

Kahoot – the token system. Polleverywhere  https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/05/21/polls-and-surveys-tools-for-education/

Symbaloo https://www.symbaloo.com/home/mix/13eOcK1fiV zotero, easybib, delicious, diigo depending on the grade

youth voices; http://youthvoices.net/ replace social media like teachertube is trying to replace youtube

quandary games in education. https://www.quandarygame.org/ sim city

citizen science alliance http://www.citizensciencealliance.org/

Toontastic https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/toontastic/id404693282?mt=8 now free  storytelling

coding and programming: https://www.makewonder.com/robots/dashanddot  scratch

Osmo : https://www.playosmo.com/en/ $79.99 + give a set for free Stride principle as a parental involvement

chainlink;

kickword; https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.makario.wordkick

red herring (four categories) https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.BlueOxTech.RedHerring&hl=en

http://www.mathplayground.com/logicgames.html

http://www.mathplayground.com/thinkingblocks.html

evaluation:

telestory  https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/telestory/id915378506?mt=8

explain everything http://explaineverything.com/

 

Exploring and Connecting 3D Printing to Teaching and Learning Jason Spartz, Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota

http://pubs.lib.umn.edu/minnesota-elearning-summit/2015/program/23/

http://pubs.lib.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=minnesota-elearning-summit

3db 3da 3d lisa

Jason Spartz, Saint Mary’s University of MinnesotaFollow
Lisa Truax, Saint Mary’s University of MinnesotaFollow
Karen Sorvaag, Saint Mary’s University of MinnesotaFollow
Brett Bodsgard, Saint Mary’s University of MinnesotaFollow

chemistry professor. 3D printing with different materials.
what else can be made (e.g. reaction vessel)

printing of atoms

crystalography dbase

Karen: pre-service teachers professor: how to use 3d printers and be comfortable with them. Steve Hoover. Thinkercad and Autodesk123D>
3D academy http://www.team3dacademy.com/index2.html
. Pinterest board for3d Printing with resources

Lisa: graphic design. not intuitive.  Rhinoceros (not free anymore). 123D strong learning curve. 3d printing will be incorporated in the curriculum.  sculpture students and others don’t like fudging on the computer, but Adobe people love it. Some items takes up to 4 hours to print out. when working on the computer is difficult for some students to visualize the dimensionality.

collaborative learning opportunities.

no makerspace or fab lab. additional interest from the theater and business dept. 3d printing is connected to future work skills. new media ecology or media literacy set of skills.

the main presenter: build excitement and interest and gradually step back. how much material goes through and should we charge back. clean and maintenance involved; not too bad. better then a copier. plastic inexpensive. sizes with plastic – $25 and $50. how many project of a spool: depending on the size of the projects but considerable amount. two printers one art dept and one in the faculty dev area.

non profit visually impaired students.  how 3d can make difference in special ed.

3d printing lab with access for everybody. ownership brings policy. where housed: neutral place.

only one printer is barely sufficient for faculty to figure out how to use it. purchasing two more if students and curricula to be involved.

 

3dc 3d lisa 3da 3db

 

The Balancing Act: Team-Creating an eBook as an Alternative Method for Content Delivery Tom Nechodomu, University of Minnesota

ebook

tnecho@umn.edu
Susan Andre sandre@umn.edu
Linda Buturian butur001@umn.edu
Faculty Created digital stories – google “cultivaitng change series”
student created digital stories –
http://www.cehd.umn.edu/academics/online/
http://www.cehd.umn.edu/PSTL/water/
http://www.cehd.umn.edu/The-Changing-story/
Susan Andre uses a slide titled “trust” to elucidate how the entire project was enabled. “trust” and “transparency” are sparse currency in the environment I work in. if she is right an ebook ain’t happening anytime soon at my place.
inclining habitat.
students involvement. use stipends. student artists. food for the video interviews. create a community, student centered.
people able to change the book.
copyright process; did you find it cumbersome. copyright permission center.
time span and amount of hours spent: 3-4 months per chapter.

Main speaker
David Wiley. Making Teaching and Learning Awesome with Open

MN Learning Commons
open educational resources
LUMEN
lumen
education – sharing feedback, encouragement with students passion about the discipline, yourself
open is not the same as free.  free + permissions + copyright permission: 5 r = retain (make and own copies), reuse (use in a wide range of ways), revise (adapt, modify, and improve), remix (combine two or more), redistribute (share with others)
open:
free and unfettered access
perpetual, irrevocable copyright permissions
(look but don’t touch is not open)
tech enables OER permits
traditionally copyright materials on the Internet – not so good ; jet on the road
openly copyright materials on the internet _ yes: jet in the air
permission-less innovation. relatively inexpensive and broad permissions.
intellectual infrastructure of education: learning outcomes/objectives; assessments; textbooks. they are relatively expensive and narrow permissions.
disappearing ink strategies: buyback, rental, ebooks, online subscription
 mad, glad, sad, rad: the grumpy cat. student success per dollar
opennetgroup.org/review
change in student learning: replace commercial with open books – small. realign, bigger change. rethink is the large change.
responsibilities:
attribution and meeting other license requirements
thin common cartridge: a way to bring the content to the CMS, but the content remains on the creative commons
github.com/lumenlearning https://github.com/lumenlearning
disposable assignment: students hate doing them, instructors hate grading them. waste of time and energy
renewable assignment: students see value in doing them; instructor sees value grading them
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsFU3sAlPx4
so what?
open education infrastructure: open outcomes, objectives, activities, educational resources
the culture of glued legos must be eradicated. open pedagogy. open credentialing model
summary: don’t settle for “affordable.” improve student outcomes. improve affordability. improve design / academic freedom

links generated from the discussion at my presentation:

https://www.google.com/search?q=tin+can&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

http://www.uwosh.edu/library/quizsmith

http://glickconsulting.com/resouce_brainegames

https://www.google.com/search?q=techers+skills&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

http://www.northeastern.edu/camd/gamedesign/people/sebastian-deterding/

https://www.duolingo.com/  Duolingo. App to learn languages using games

http://www.gamification.co/gabe-zichermann/

https://zebrazapps.com/  ZebraZapps

DGBL and digital literacies

Digital game-based learning levels up digital literacies

http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/anotherbyteofknowledge/digital-game-based-learning-levels-up-digital-literacies/

My note: excellent Australian article, which presents a very strong point on digital literacies (metaliteracies, see URL below) from educators (versus library) perspective. Connected with game-based learning, it clearly renders the traditional perspective of information literacy as miniscules and the notion of digital literacy being “information literacy on steroids” as obsolete. It clearly shows that the “xxx-literacies” are clearly not a domain of the librarians and if the librarians do not wised up and allow other faculty who are “not librarians” to equally participate, they might well count with those faculty going on their own (as it is transparent from this article).

connections will be made between  digital game-based learning and digital literacies to show that digital game-based learning is a powerful pedagogy that incorporates the elements of digital literacies. Through the adoption of game-based learning, digital literacies can be taught in context. Digital literacies are the skills that connect the learning content (curriculum) and digital games are the platform that these digital literacies can be practised within a meaningful context.

Digital literacies is an umbrella term that includes a combination of literacies – visual literacy, media literacy, collaborative literacy, ICT literacy, information literacy – that are needed to take an active, participatory role in life, now and in the future (Hague & Payton, 2010, p. 2).

Bawden (2008), cites Gilster (1997), who defines digital literacy as “an ability to understand and use information from a variety of digital sources and regard it as literacy in the digital age” (p.18).

Jisc, identify in their Digital Literacy Guide that it is a concept that is contextual and it is not static.  Change is imminent as new technologies develop “at breakneck speeds” (Becker, 2011, p. 76), therefore, it can be inferred the digital literacies required to use these new technologies need to be adaptable and flexible to these changes (Haste, 2009).

Cooper, Lockyer & Brown (2013), highlight this plurality by using the term “multiliteracies” which can be understood as synonymous with digital literacies.  Cooper et al. (2013), explain multiliteracies is required as a “broader view of literacy” (p. 94), is needed as a result of the diverse range of communications tools, therefore, context is implied.  Ng (2012) also highlights this idea that digital literacy is “the multiplicity of literacies associated with the use of digital technologies” (p. 1066).  The combination of multiliteracies and technologies would also suggest that multimodality is an important element of digital literacy (McLoughlin, 2011) .

7 elements of digital literacy in their Developing Digital Literacies Guide (2014), which can be seen below.

DGBL and digital literacy

 

digital games (Pivec & Pivec, 2011), which can also be called computer games (Whitton, 2011), video games (Turkay, Hoffman, Kinzer, Chantes & Vicari, 2014) or serious games (Arnab et al., 2012) rather than gamification.

Digital game-based learning then is using digital games in the learning environment with the purpose of achieving learning aligned with learning theory.

Cognitive constructivism is a learning theory that game-based learning could be aligned (Orr & McGuinness, 2014; St-Pierre, 2011).  This learning theory builds upon the theories of Piaget and Bruner, therefore, an important consideration in the digital game-based classroom would be that choosing games needs to fit the age and level of intellectual development the students are at (St-Pierre, 2011).

A major focus of the socio-constructivist learning theory is that of Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (St-Pierre, 2011).  The learning is designed “just beyond what the learner can do” (Orr & McGuinness, 2014, p. 223) and takes them beyond where their knowledge already exists.

More on digital literacy (metaliteracy) and DGBL in this IMS blog:

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/11/30/game-based-learning/

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

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

 

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/02/20/digital-literacy-2/

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=digital+literacy

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/11/27/reframing-informatioan-literacy-as-a-metaliteracy/

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

Bluepulse

I am including a couple whitepapers you can review and forward to all staff who may be curious about our teaching and learning tool and would be attending the demo on May 11th at 1.00pm

Please see the go to meeting instructions for our Bluepulse v1.5 walkthrough.

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/822849653

United States: +1 (312) 757-3126

Access Code: 822-849-653

As you mentioned faculty may be very interested in using Bluepulse, I wanted to include the link for our instructor video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgdpQT3jkBQ&feature=youtu.be

If you have any questions about the integration, training or implementation, please do not hesitate to email or call and as always I am more than happy to help.

Warm regards,

Nick Sankar

Bluepulse Account Manager

MY NOTES:

http://www.explorance.com/

harvest students; feedback – anonymous way to ask questions. D2L surveys offer already this opportunity; Twitter and other the free options for polling apps give the same option, e.g. Polleverywhere gives a word cloud option

the follow up q/n as demonstrated is limited to 160 characters. Why?

i like that it compartmentalize the anonymity but I really ask myself: would SCSU faculty go to such length?

presumptions: non-tenured faculty is interested in the top layers students and wants to find out what works for them best. this loaded, since, if there ARE different learning styles, then what worked for the top layer might be exactly what did not work for the bottom layer, but this approach will gave the faculty a justification to keep stratifying students, instead of thinking of diverse ways to approach all layers. this part of sale, not pedagogy. sorry.

weakness; the entire presentation is trying to sell a product, which might be good for different campus, but not for SCSU, where faculty are overworked, the class load is so great that going to such details might be questionable.

exporting CSV for data massaging is not big deal. indeed the easy of this particular software is admirable, but if the faculty has time to go into such details, they can export the data from D2L or Google Forms and open it in SPSS

Greg’s question: mobility.

libraries and services. pole users without being tied to course. again, that all can be done with other services in the library. if the library cares about it at all.

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

 

1 8 9 10 11 12