Archive of ‘instructional technology’ category

mindmapping

Three Mind Mapping Tools That Save to Google Drive

http://www.freetech4teachers.com/2014/03/three-mind-mapping-tools-that-save-to.html

MindMup
Lucidchart
Mindmeister

7 Tools for Creating Flowcharts, Mind Maps, and Diagrams

http://www.freetech4teachers.com/2015/11/flowcharts-mindmaps-diagrams.html

Coggle

MindMup

Sketchlot

Connected Mind is a free mind mapping tool that you can find in the Google Chrome Web Store.

Stormboard
Lucidchart
Text 2 Mind Map

3D printing Curriculum

Stratasys launches Free 3D printing Curriculum

http://campustechnology.com/articles/2014/12/04/stratasys-launches-free-3d-printing-curriculum.aspx

Here is a link to the first unit: web.stcloudstate.edu/informedia/3dprint/U01.zip
The documents are big (up to 400MB). Please let us know, if you want to work together.

no more MS Word; welcome mobile devices

Sorry, Microsoft! A Bunch Of Teenagers Just Talked About Doing School Work And None Of Them Use Word

 http://www.businessinsider.com/teenagers-on-productivity-apps-google-docs-2014-12#ixzz3KmvL28W6
“I’ll start typing essays on my iPhone’s Notes app,” one student said. Because of an Apple feature called “Handoff,” he can then pick up right where he left off on his computer.

online course design

From the LinkedIn discussion group Higher Education Teaching and Learning

STUCK IN THE 90S: ONLINE COURSE DESIGN IN TRADITIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION

http://higheredmanagement.net/2014/10/22/stuck-in-the-90s-online-course-design-in-traditional-higher-education/

Of course, not all aspects of online course design require a team of specialists, a longer development time, and more funding. Some things can be done quickly, cheaply and by individuals with focused skill sets.

But technology can, when built with a deep understanding of how students learn, meet both of these needs. We can build online courses that provide students with hundreds of opportunities to test their knowledge. Using scientifically-based learning analytics, we can provide each learner with immediate, context-specific feedback. We can build software that constantly responds to each student’s cognitive and educational differences and serves up activities that address these differences.

  • Michael Berta, Ed.D.Michael

    Michael Berta, Ed.D.

    Educator, technologist, researcher, and innovator in edtech, distance education, and faculty development

    “Placing the burden on lone educators with minuscule (or non-existent) funding and who are not hired for their strengths in instructional media development is neither logical, nor fair. But more to the point, it’s a lost opportunity to leverage high-quality course design to drive improvements in learning outcomes.”

    I could not agree more with this statement and the remainder of the article. I’ve long supported an instructional design partnership model where faculty occupy a leading role along with other professionals capable of making the interactions, activities, and rich-media meet the quality needs of an increasingly complex learning environment (and world).

  • Judith

    Judith Killion

    Editor at Individual Basis

    We need to start imagining new models for building, acquiring and sharing instructional media.

    This has always been an issue. My students love activities that provide them with immediate feedback. I spend extra hours building a wide variety of different activities into each Learning module. It takes time and effort and if I am going to address different learning styles that is an entirely different issue. To create effective interactive learning tools that will not waste my students time and will challenge their skill level consumes more time than planning for a face to face class with different activities. I would love to talk to someone-be able to explain what I want my students to learn, suggest a few interactive choices, and come back later to find age related learning activities that fit different learning styles.

  • Alex TolleyAlex

    Alex Tolley

    Owner, MyMeemz

    There is going to be a fight because this model is more like a business product that educators contribute to, rather than own. Perhaps this is the true industrialization of education, replacing the craft model of individual teaching with standardized, high quality product?

  • Maria LaverghettaMaria

    Maria Laverghetta

    Enrollment Advisor – Pearson Embanet

    I have forwarded this article on to members of the course development team within Pearson for their feedback. I am curious to see their impression of the article versus mine, considering I predominantly am a part of recruitment services for Pearson specifically. Within our academic partnerships platform, we do contend with faculty, should they employ our course development team, to this vein because the ownership usually rests with the instructor solely. Editing course content or abridging related material so that it could be received potentially as more either user-friendly or technologically savvy can be a source of major contention with faculty members. I do agree that this is an industrialization of education to an extent, but it also pushes the ownership of traditional education past the instructor, a predominantly sole proprietorship environment, to an completely different team effort. The natural technological growing pains coupled with role expansion and differentiation are also issues needing to be addressed as well.

  • Alex TolleyAlex

    Alex Tolley

    Owner, MyMeemz

    Suppose one was to take this seriously. What might such a course look like – for a subject like Biology? Could it be built on existing LMS platforms, or is a new platform required?

  • Judith

    Judith Killion

    Editor at Individual Basis

    I think that both individual ownership and team collaboration are important to the development of successful online learning. We (hopefully) use the concepts of group and team learning in our classroom environments. We should not be afraid to open ourselves up to some of the positive opportunities that could develop from participating in these practices. It does not mean giving up our ownership of content and presentation. I see it as a marketplace of choice where instructors can decide what kinds of activities, helps, prompts, extra materials, and resources they want to add to their class content. The choices could be categorized by learning styles or how they fit into learning paradigms. I think we must face the reality that some parts of education will have to be more industrialized than others just because of the delivery method. This does not have to be a negative issue if there are enough choices to help instructors develop the rigorous content they want to deliver without sacrificing their entire life to the project.

Early Learners’ Tech Use

‘Screen Time’ Alone Too Limited a Gauge of Early Learners’ Tech Use, Report Says

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/DigitalEducation/2014/10/screen_time_early_learners_RAND.html

screen time as the sole measure of what’s OK for children is no longer adequate, the RAND researchers argue that screen-time limits shoudn’t go the way of the VCR:

Limits on screen time may remain important in restricting use that is passive, sedentary, or noneducational, and they may also prove useful in ensuring that children engage in a balanced combination of activities.

However, a more-comprehensive definition of developmentally appropriate technology use will empower ECE providers and families to make better decisions about the ways in which young children use technology–and help maximize the benefits young children receive from this use.

my note: information on Pinterest still goes the other direction. E.g.:
http://www.pinterest.com/pin/284923113897755173/
screen time

1 84 85 86 87 88 91