Searching for "teaching and learning"

ELI Online Event XR

ELI Online Event | eXtended Reality (XR): How AR, VR, and MR Are Extending Learning Opportunities

May 22 and 24, 2018 | 12:00 noon – 3:35 p.m. ET

https://events.educause.edu/eli/focus-sessions/2018/extended-reality-xr-how-ar-vr-and-mr-are-extending-learning-opportunities

https://twitter.com/search?q=%23elifocus #elifocus

https://www.educause.edu/badging

Over the past year, interest in eXtended reality (XR) technologies (such as virtual, augmented, immersive, and mixed reality) has surged. New and more affordable XR technologies, along with voice activation and sophisticated visual display walls, provide promising directions and opportunities to immerse learners in the curriculum, offering deeper and more vivid learning experiences and extending the learning environment. But what’s the curricular reality with respect to these technologies? What is hype and what is substance? Specifically:

  • What practical applications do “XR technologies” have for teaching, learning, and research?
  • How are these technologies being applied to engage learners as consumers and creators of XR experiences?
  • What evidence is there to support XR technologies as effective tools in the learning environment?
  • How can these technologies be integrated into learning spaces?
  • What are the ethical questions we should consider as we explore XR?

Overselling of Education Technology

The Overselling of Education Technology

By Alfie Kohn     Mar 16, 2016

https://www.edsurge.com/news/2016-03-16-the-overselling-of-education-technology

Basically, my response to ed tech is “It depends.” And one key consideration on which it depends is the reason given for supporting it.

ads in education periodicals, booths at conferences, and advocacy organizations are selling not only specific kinds of software but the whole idea that ed tech is de rigueur for any school that doesn’t want to risk being tagged as “twentieth century.”

Other people, particularly politicians, defend technology on the grounds that it will keep our students “competitive in the global economy.” This catch-all justification has been invoked to support other dubious policies, including highly prescriptive, one-size-fits-all national curriculum standards. It’s based on two premises: that decisions about children’s learning should be driven by economic considerations, and that people in other countries should be seen primarily as rivals to be defeated.

But the rationale that I find most disturbing—despite, or perhaps because of, the fact that it’s rarely made explicit—is the idea that technology will increase our efficiency…at teaching the same way that children have been taught for a very long time.

a deeper question: “What kinds of learning should be taking place in those schools?” If we favor an approach by which students actively construct meaning, an interactive process that involves a deep understanding of ideas and emerges from the interests and questions of the learners themselves, well, then we’d be open to the kinds of technology that truly support this kind of inquiry. Show me something that helps kids create, design, produce, construct—and I’m on board. Show me something that helps them make things collaboratively (rather than just on their own), and I’m even more interested—although it’s important to keep in mind that meaningful learning never requires technology, so even here we should object whenever we’re told that software (or a device with a screen) is essential.

more worrisome are the variants of ed tech that deal with grades and tests, making them even more destructive than they already are: putting grades online (thereby increasing their salience and their damaging effects), using computers to administer tests and score essays, and setting up “embedded” assessment that’s marketed as “competency-based.”

we shouldn’t confuse personalized learning with personal learning. The first involves adjusting the difficulty level of prefabricated skills-based exercises based on students’ test scores, and it requires the purchase of software. The second involves working with each student to create projects of intellectual discovery that reflect his or her unique needs and interests, and it requires the presence of a caring teacher who knows each child well.

a recent review found that studies of tech-based personalized instruction “show mixed results ranging from modest impacts to no impact” – despite the fact that it’s remarkably expensive. In fact, ed tech of various kinds has made headlines lately for reasons that can’t be welcome to its proponents. According to an article in Education Week, “a host of national and regional surveys suggest that teachers are far more likely to use tech to make their own jobs easier and to supplement traditional instructional strategies than to put students in control of their own learning.” Last fall, meanwhile, OECD reportednegative outcomes when students spent a lot of time using computers, while Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes

Ed tech is increasingly making its way even into classrooms for young children. And the federal government is pushing this stuff unreservedly: Check out the U.S. Office of Education Technology’s 2016 plan recommending greater use of “embedded” assessment, which “includes ongoing gathering and sharing of data,” plus, in a development that seems inevitable in retrospect, a tech-based program to foster a “growth mindset” in children. There’s much more in that plan, too—virtually all of it, as blogger Emily Talmage points out, uncannily aligned with the wish list of the Digital Learning Council, a group consisting largely of conservative advocacy groups and foundations, and corporations with a financial interest in promoting ed tech.

++++++++++++++++
more on technology literacy in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=technology+literacy

Differentiated Instruction strategies

4 ways to implement Differentiated Instruction strategies in the classroom

4 ways to implement Differentiated Instruction strategies in the classroom

differentiated instruction and assessment, also known as differentiated learning, is the framework you need to reach students through different avenues of learning.

integrating scaffolding strategies

1. Create a differentiated learning environment – The first differentiation technique changes up the physical layout of the classroom. Organize your classroom into flexible workstations.

2. Prepare thoughtful lessons backed by data – Before you even begin teaching each lesson, you should examine past assessments, collected data, work samples and student observations to identify specific instructional strengths for each student.

3. Tailor assignments based on students’ learning goals – Using differentiation strategies to shake up the end product that students turn in for assignments can also help you reach different learners. Some students are visual learners, while others may be auditory learners or readers. My Note: this has been rejected: see learning styles:
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/04/05/learning-styles-debunked/

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2016/01/01/the-learning-styles-myth/

4. Adjust your lesson content based on student needs –  The most apparent way of differentiating the learning process is to change the type of content you use in your lessons.

Disruption in Higher Education

What to Expect in an Era of Disruption in Higher Education

Jim Black President & CEO of SEM Works https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-expect-era-disruption-higher-education-jim-black/

1. Determine what the customer craves and deliver it. In the case of college and university students, there are limits. Balancing student wants and desires with what they actually need to be successful students and engaged citizens can, in fact, be extremely challenging. “The customer is always right” philosophy practiced by many businesses simply does not fit with the mission of postsecondary institutions. Instead, the role of educators is to advance and apply knowledge, facilitate the exploration of ideas, foster cognitive dissonance, prepare students as lifelong learners and productive workers, and even, hold them accountable for their actions or inactions. Ideally, the college experience should be transformational—helping students become the best person they can be. With that said, failing to align teaching methods, curriculum, academic programs, and institutional services with the needs and expectations of students is a perilous path.

2. Create unexpected value. Incumbent institutions tend to focus on known problems (e.g., student attrition causation factors, poor service delivery, cumbersome processes, undersubscribed programs, insufficient class availability). True disruption seldom occurs in this space. Creating value where it did not exist before or was not expected spawns disruption. In the private sector, such intuitive value ideation is seen in Disney’s “Imagineering” the attractions in its theme parks, Apple’s invention of the iPhone, and Airbnb’s alternative to staying with the multitudes at expensive, disturbingly uniform hotel chains. This is what the authors of Blue Ocean Strategy characterize as swimming in the “blue ocean”, where there are few, if any, competitors (Kim, W. C. & Mauborgne, R., 2005). No disruptor is found in the “red ocean” crowded with similar competitors.

3. Avoid being average. If your school is one of the elite, well-known few, with highly selective admissions, it is not average. However, the vast majority of colleges and universities do not fit this profile. They have to find other ways to distinguish themselves. A capstone student experience, an innovative curriculum, guaranteed internship placement or study abroad, digital career portfolios, or a unique pricing model represent just a few examples. While it would be ideal to find something that makes your institution distinctive throughout the nation or the world, that is highly improbable. A more attainable goal is to position your institution uniquely among your direct competitors.

4. Identify the potential for expansion. As it relates to student enrollment growth, expansion opportunities are usually found within one or more of four domains: (1) thorough penetration of your existing primary market, where the institution and its academic programs have a strong presence, (2) the introduction of new programs into your primary market, (3) promotion of the institution and existing programs in a new market, and (4) diversification—new programs and new markets. Each domain has inherent risks and potential rewards. Risk levels are illustrated in Figure 1 and are described here.

Primary market penetration possesses the lowest risk, requires the least investment of resources, and has the fastest return on investment. Depending on an institution’s primary market, this domain also may produce only modest new enrollments. Option two, mounting new programs in an institution’s existing primary market has risks associated with conducting the proper market research to determine student and industry demand as well as market saturation. Another common risk relates to the degree to which new program offerings are adequately promoted. An obvious upside to this domain is that the institution already has visibility in the market. Taking the current program array to a new marketrequires the time and resources to develop a presence where none has previously existed. Sending recruiters to a new territory once or twice a year is woefully insufficient. Creating such visibility requires a sustained physical presence with area recruiters or alumni volunteers, targeted advertising, networking with schools and other organizations in the region, and strategic partnerships. Finally, diversification carries with it the highest level of risk because it involves assuming all the risks of launching new programs in a market with no prior visibility. If executed effectively, however, this domain can generate an abundance of new students.
market expansion risk

5. Disruption always comes at a cost. It is true that your institution may create a disruption by leveraging existing technologies and human capital. Yet, no organization can avoid the cultural and real costs associated with unlearning old ways, creating new programs and business models, scaling innovations, or marketing a new approach. These costs must be weighed judiciously against potential benefits of such a paradigm shift. Once a decision is made to pull the trigger, the change process must be managed carefully with the upfront inclusion of key stakeholders.

6. Equate disruption with innovation, not extinction. The rise of educational disruptors can be unsettling. If disruption is simply perceived as a threat to the way of life in the academy or ignored, the results will be devastating for many higher education institutions. Conversely, if disruption pushes college leaders and enrollment managers out of their comfort zone and they reinvent their institutions, the educational experience of students will be greatly enhanced. In a time of creative destruction, the winners are those who exert extraordinary efforts to go beyond traditional norms, which is not always the early adopters of a new educational model or practice.

7. Successful disruptors pursue four disciplines simultaneously. The four disciplines translated into the higher education lexicon include low costs, relational connections with students, program innovations, and rapid time-to-market. Of these, student connections is the only discipline college and universities excel at consistently. To thrive in a future with a seemingly infinite number of nimble disruptive innovators, educators must compete in the other three disciplines as well.

++++++++++++++
more about higher ed in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=higher+ed

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/07/14/disrupting-higher-education/

distance education theories

Transactional Distance

online learning is most effective when the perceived pedagogical distance between the instructor and students in the course is minimized with increased interaction; Interaction occurs through learner-instructor communication, learner-learner collaboration, and learner-content engagement. All three levels of interaction have important implications for effective online learning

popular:

8 Tips To Minimize Transactional Distance In eLearning

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_distance

dissertations:

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cehsdiss/51

https://etd.auburn.edu/bitstream/handle/10415/5764/Dissertation_lebeck.pdf

http://faculty.jou.ufl.edu/mleslie/spring96/moore.html

Classes:

https://ci484-learning-technologies.wikispaces.com/Transactional+Distance+Theory

By M. Moore:

Moore, M. (1972). Learner autonomy: The second dimension of independent learning.Convergence, 5, 76-88.

Moore, M. (1973). Toward a theory of independent learning and teaching. Journal of Higher Education, 44, 661-679.

Moore, M. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp.22-38).New York: Routledge.

Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3 (2), 1-6.

Moore, M. G. (2007). The theory of transactional distance. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of  distance education (2nd ed.), (pp.89-105). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Moore, M. G., (2013). Handbook of distance education (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge

Community of Inquiry (CoI)

The Community of Inquiry theoretical framework focuses on the degree of presence in the online learning environment. Presence is vital to student success in online courses. There are three types of presence that must be maintained: 1. Social presence to increase learners’ sense of community in the online environment, 2. Cognitive presence to enable learners to construct meaning from the online experience, and 3. Teaching presence to increase learner perception of the instructor’s ability to provide structure and direction in the online environment

popular:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_of_inquiry

https://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Community_of_inquiry_model

https://coi.athabascau.ca/coi-model/

Community of Inquiry from Phil Ice

peer reviewed:
https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/18714/INTHIG%20369%20INTRO.pdf

https://www.academia.edu/398997/A_Constructivist_Approach_to_Online_Learning_The_Community_of_Inquiry_Framework

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED387454

By Garrison:

Garrison,  D. R., & Akyol, Z. (2013).  The community of inquiry theoretical framework. In M. Moore, Handbook of Distance Education (3 ed.) (pp. 104-119). New York: Routledge.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based

environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2/3), 87-105.

Garrison, D.R. and Arbaugh, J.B. (2007). Researching the Community of Inquiry framework:

Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education 10(3): 157–172 (2007).

Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19, 133-148.

+++++++++++++++++++++
more on distance education in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=distance+education

Exemplary Course Program Rubric

Exemplary Course Program Rubric

http://www.blackboard.com/resources/catalyst-awards
if problems with the link above, try this one:
/bb_exemplary_course_rubric_apr2017.pdf

Course Design

Course Design addresses elements of instructional design. For the purpose of this rubric, course design includes such elements as structure of the course, learning objectives, organization of content, and instructional strategies.

Interaction and Collaboration

Interaction denotes communication between and among learners and instructors, synchronously or asynchronously. Collaboration is a subset of interaction and refers specifically to those activities in which groups are working interdependently toward a shared result. This differs from group activities that can be completed by students working independently of one another and then combining the results, much as one would when assembling a jigsaw puzzle with parts of the puzzle worked out separately then assembled together. A learning community is defined here as the sense of belonging to a group, rather than each student perceiving himself/herself studying independently.

Assessment

Assessment focuses on instructional activities designed to measure progress toward learning outcomes, provide feedback to students and instructors, and/or enable grading or evaluation. This section addresses the quality and type of student assessments within the course.

Learner Support

Learner Support addresses the support resources made available to students taking the course. Such resources may be accessible within or external to the course environment. Learner support resources address a variety of student services.

+++++++++++
more on online teaching in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=online+teaching

more on rubrics in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=rubric

edtech implementation fails

5 All-Too-Common Ways Edtech Implementations Fail

By Chris Liang-Vergara and Kerry Gallagher (Columnist)     Apr 6, 2017

https://www.edsurge.com/news/2017-04-06-5-all-too-common-ways-edtech-implementations-fail

On the surface, adopting technology to support teacher needs or student challenges isn’t terribly complex: define the problem you’re trying to solve, identify the right tools for the job, and implement the tools effectively and with fidelity.

challenges. End users are too often removed from the decision-making process during procurement. Educators argue that too many products don’t actually meet the needs of teachers or students. Still others worry that it is too easy to implement new and popular technology without considering whether it is research-based and effective.

Only 33 percent of parents surveyed by the Learning Assembly said their child’s school did an excellent job using technology to tailor instruction.

  • Understanding Purpose

Technology is just a tool, not a means in and of itself. Any school or teacher that sets out to use technology for its sake alone, and not in the service of personalizing learning or addressing specific needs, is on a mission to fail.

  • Insufficient Modeling of Best Practices

A survey from Samsung found that 37 percent of teachers say they would love to use technology but don’t know how, and 76 percent say they would like a professional development day dedicated to technology.

ideos that focus on scaling and modeling best practices (produced by places like the Teaching Channel and The Learning Accelerator) can help teachers and schools do this.

  • Bad First Impressions

Teachers face initiative fatigue: They are constantly being asked to implement new programs, integrate new technologies, and add on layers of responsibility. In one Wisconsin district, nearly half of teachers felt ongoing district initiatives were a “significant area of concern.”

Forward-thinking schools take the time to learn from the challenges of other schools, and recruit a coalition of the willing.

  • Real-World Usability Challenges

Relying on multiple devices (remote, clicker, iPad, computer mouse) to launch or navigate technology can be difficult. Additionally, teachers may start to use a tool, only to realize it is not flexible enough to meet their original needs, fit into the constraints of their particular school or classroom, or allow them to integrate their own content or supplemental resources.

  • The Right Data to Track Progress

Lack of useful data, problem definition, weak teacher buy-in, first impressions, and usability challenges all have the potential to torpedo smart technology products.

 

new D2L Brightspace features

What: Overview of new D2L Brightspace features
When: Monday, April 9 at 10:00 AM
Please join us to learn about the new features that will be available in D2L Brightspace as of June 2, 2018. The session will be recorded.

D2L cloud is the big news. stcloudstate.learn.minnstate.edu will be the link to log into the cloud.

Here are the latest updates on Minnesota State’s move to D2L Brightspace cloud services.
Review a recording (44:07) or slides from the session.  A comprehensive list of features is also available for faculty. This document will be updated again after April 10 and May 7 releases are available at our QA cloud sites.

To explore these new features on your own, go to your “quality assurance” (QA) test site in D2L’s cloud available athttps://YourCampusQA.brightspace.comhttps://stcloudstate.brightspace.com

Quizzes, HTML editor and intelligent agents have videos featuring new stuff.

  • HTML Editor – Edit images in the editor. See video (2:30)
  • Intelligent Agents – See video (4:36)
  • Quiz/Question Library – The ability to search the text of quiz questions. See video (7:00)
  • Quizzes – Add a quiz due date, in addition to a start and end date.
  • Quiz Taking – Students start and submit a quiz with fewer clicks.
  • Manage Dates Tool –  ‘Due Dates’ are now included.
  • Additional features will be rolled out to the QA cloud on April 10 (version 10.8.0) and May 7 (version 10.8.1)
  • ePortfolio -“A digital showcase for the learning journey. It helps you document the experience, reflect on it, and share ideas and achievements as they happen.”  D2L has provided an overview video and a video to help you navigate this new tool for Minnesota State campuses.  Look for an invitation to an overview session on April 18.

IP restriction, which is supposed to alleviate proctoring issues. But this will work only for oncampus quizzes. not for online classes.

The Quiz library being moved to the cloud. Does this mean that the Quiz Library can be shared across institutions? E.g. if faculty from one university is teaching biology and has developed a quiz library content, it can be shared with the content of a faculty from another university? All bells and whistles so far are only secondary to the fact that content generation remains most important for faculty and if faculty can share their test banks, I see this as the most advantageous of moving to a cloud.

eportfolio – new D2L tool. April 18 overview scheduled. so, isn’t in collision with TK20? I, personally, think that LInkedIn is the way to go. I will not mention eFolio MN, since it is a losing bet.
So, how we reconcile the existence of several platforms for eportofolio?

SSO. single sign on. Adobe Connect, Mediaspace and service desk are already on SSO. signing in one application allows to move to D2L without having to sign on again.

https://mnscu.sharepoint.com/sites/ims/SitePages/Home.aspx

on that site, there are resources for faculty: https://mnscu.sharepoint.com/sites/IMS/SitePages/Faculty%20Resources.aspx

mental toughness

Sheryl Sandberg Is Teaching a New Free Online Course on Mental Toughness

Sandberg and her Option B co-author Adam Grant believe resilience is a skill you can learn.


++++++++++++
more on mindfulness in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=mindfulness

1 35 36 37 38 39 47