InforMedia Services (IMS)

Technology Instruction for St. Cloud State University

Archive for the 'educational technology' Category

Education 2.0 Vs Education 3.0

Posted by Plamen Miltenoff on 16th March 2014

some_text

Posted in digital naitives, educational technology, instructional technology, learning, online learning, teaching, technology, technology literacy | 2 Comments »

Free Technology for Teachers: 5 Video Projects to Try With Your Students

Posted by Plamen Miltenoff on 15th March 2014

Free Technology for Teachers: 5 Video Projects to Try With Your Students

http://www.freetech4teachers.com/2012/08/5-video-projects-to-try-with-your.html?m=1

Posted in Digital literacy, digital storytelling, educational technology, instructional technology, mobile learning, teaching, technology literacy, video, video editing | No Comments »

literature on online teaching

Posted by Plamen Miltenoff on 22nd January 2014

A former SCSU faculty asked me to help her with literature regarding online learning; she is applying to teach complete online somewhere in the South.

Hey Plamen, Do you have any reading suggestions regarding teaching online? I am applying for a job at ?????? and the program is completely online. I want to be current with the literature if I happen to get an interview.

Hey ???,

It is a simple question, with ever growing complex answer. 2013 was announced as the “MOOC” year and that term literally killed the tag “online education.” Most of the literature on online teaching now is subdued one way or another under MOOC.

However, there are still authors, who are widely cited as “foundational.” E.g.: Susan Ko, Paloff and Pratt

Ko, S., & Rossen, S. (2010). Teaching Online: A Practical Guide. Taylor & Francis.

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2010). Collaborating Online: Learning Together in Community. John Wiley & Sons.

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2009). Assessing the Online Learner: Resources and Strategies for Faculty. John Wiley & Sons.

Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2005). Distance education: A systems view (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth. http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic541040.files/Moore%20Theoretical%20Basis%20for%20Distance%20Education.pdf

Moore, M. G. (2013). Handbook of Distance Education. Routledge.

There is a long list of articles, which I am collecting through the years. You can peruse them and choose any further readings, if you want…

 

Adolphus, M. (2009). USING THE WEB TO teach information literacy. Online, 33(4), 20-25.

Andersen, M. H. (2011). The world is my school: Welcome to the era of personalized learning. Futurist, 45(1), 12-17.

Borja, R. R. (2004). New player in online school market pursues profits. Education Week, 24(15), 8-8.

Brooks-Kirkland, A. (2006). Podcasting for learning. School Libraries in Canada (17108535), 25(4), 44-48.

Ćukušić, M., Alfirević, N., Granić, A., & Garača, Ž. (2010). e-learning process management and the e-learning performance: Results of a european empirical study. Computers & Education, 55(2), 554-565.

Ćukušić, M., Alfirević, N., Granić, A., & Garača, Ž. (2010). e-learning process management and the e-learning performance: Results of a european empirical study. Computers & Education, 55(2), 554-565.

Ćukušić, M., Alfirević, N., Granić, A., & Garača, Ž. (2010). e-learning process management and the e-learning performance: Results of a european empirical study. Computers & Education, 55(2), 554-565.

de Freitas, S., & Veletsianos, G. (2010). Editorial: Crossing boundaries: Learning and teaching in virtual worlds. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 3-9.

Department of education report: Its importance, one year later. (cover story).(2010). Distance Education Report, 15(12), 1-7.

Falloon, G. (2010). Using avatars and virtual environments in learning: What do they have to offer? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 108-122.

Hrastinski, S., Keller, C., & Carlsson, S. A. (2010). Design exemplars for synchronous e-learning: A design theory approach. Computers & Education, 55(2), 652-662.

Karagiorgi, Y., & Symeou, L. (2005). Translating constructivism into instructional design: Potential and limitations. Educational Technology & Society, 8(1), 17-27.

Keengwe, J., Schnellert, G., & Miltenoff, P. (2011). Technology and globalization in higher education., 2535-2538.

Ketelhut, D. J., Nelson, B. C., Clarke, J., & Dede, C. (2010). A multi-user virtual environment for building and assessing higher order inquiry skills in science. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 56-68.

Kim, P., Ng, C. K., & Lim, G. (2010). When cloud computing meets with semantic web: A new design for e-portfolio systems in the social media era. British Journal of Educational Technology,41(6), 1018-1028.

Kolowich, S. (2009). MIT tops world ranking of university web sites. Chronicle of Higher Education, 55(24), A15-A15.

Leach, J. (2008). Do new information and communications technologies have a role to play in the achievement of education for all? British Educational Research Journal, 34(6), 783-805.

Levine, A., Levine, A., & Dean, D. R. (2012). Generation on a tightrope : A portrait of today’s college student. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Mangu-Ward, K. (2010). Teachers unions vs. online education. Reason, 42(4), 44-50.

Nistor, N., & Neubauer, K. (2010). From participation to dropout: Quantitative participation patterns in online university courses. Computers & Education, 55(2), 663-672.

Ramig, R. (2009). Social media in the classroom. Multimedia & internet@schools, 16(6), 8-10.

Ramig, R. (2009). Social media in the classroom. Multimedia & internet@schools, 16(6), 8-10.

Schiller, K. (2009). Augmented reality comes to market. (cover story). Information Today, 26(11), 1-46.

Šumak, B., Heričko, M., & Pušnik, M. (2011). A meta-analysis of e-learning technology acceptance: The role of user types and e-learning technology types. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2067-2077.

Tallent-Runnels, M., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., et al. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93-135.

Tallent-Runnels, M., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., et al. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93-135.

Tallent-Runnels, M., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., et al. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93-135.

Wang, H., & Shao, M. (2008). Desire2Learn for quality matters., 1335-1339.

 

 

Posted in e-learning, educational technology, mobile learning, mooc, online learning | No Comments »

trends in technology for educators

Posted by Plamen Miltenoff on 17th January 2014

Campus Technology, a leading periodical in the use of technology in education, lists for consideration the 2014 technology trends for education:
  1. Mobile Platforms and Bring Your Own Device (BYOD)
  2. Adaptive Learning (personalization of online learning)
  3. Big Data (predictive analysis)
  4. Flipped Classroom
  5. Badges and Gamification (assessment and evaluation)
  6. iPADs and Other Tablets (mobile devices)
  7. Learning Management Systems (on SCSU campus – D2L)
The Journal
has a similar list:
  1. BYOD (it is a trend going up)
  2. Social Media as a Teaching and Learning Tool ( trend going up))
  3. Digital Badges (split vote, some of the experts expect to see the us of badges and gamification as soon as in 2014, some think, it will take longer time to adopt)
  4. Open Educational Resources (split vote, while the future of OER is recognized, the initial investment needed, will take time)
  5. Desktop Computers (it is a trend going down; every market shows a decline in the purchase of desktop computers)
  6. iPADs: (trend going up)
  7. ePortfolios (trend going down)
  8. Learning Management Systems, on SCSU campus – D2L (split vote). LMS is useful for flipped classroom, hybrid and online education uses CMS, but gradual consolidation stifles competition
  9. Learning Analytics, Common Core (trend going up)
  10. Game-Based Learning (split vote), but the gaming industry is still not to the point to create engaging educational games
Regarding computer operating systems (OS):
  1. Windows (trend going down)
  2. Apple / Mac OS X (split vote)
  3. iOS (iPhone, iPAD etc) (trend going up)
  4. Android (trend going up)
The materials in these two articles are consistent with other reports as reflected in our IMS blog:
IMS offers an extensive numbers of instructional sessions on social media, D2L and other educational technologies:
Please consider registering for any of the sessions and/or request sessions customized to you classes and needs: http://lrts.stcloudstate.edu/library/general/ims/default.asp
Please email us with any other suggestions, ideas and requests regarding instructional technology and instructional design at: ims@stcloudstate.edu
Follow us:
Twitter: @scsutechinstruc #techinstruct
Blog: http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims
Pinterest: http://www.pinterest.com/scsutechnology/scsu-technology-instruction/
Instagram: http://instagram.com/scsutechinstruct 

Posted in Desire2Learn (D2L), educational technology, gamification, gaming, information literacy, media literacy, mobile apps, online learning, technology, technology literacy | No Comments »

free web-conferencing tool: Stoodle

Posted by Plamen Miltenoff on 8th January 2014

Stoodle is a web application which allows you, without any download or registration, to create a quick classroom space. By sharing the URL of the classroom you can invite other participants. You can use microphone or text based chat, and upload files (images) to discuss.

Posted in distance learning, distributive learning, educational technology, hybrid learning, instructional technology, mobile learning, online learning, Uncategorized | No Comments »

A Quick Start Guide to Participating in Twitter Chats

Posted by Plamen Miltenoff on 20th November 2013

A Quick Start Guide to Participating in Twitter Chats

http://www.guide2digitallearning.com/blog_tom_murray/quick_start_guide_twitter_chats

This past week, I had the privilege of introducing US Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, as a guest moderator for #edtechchat, an educational Twitter chat that I founded with four members of my personal learning network (PLN).  Over the course of 60 minutes, almost 2,000 people from around the world, shared about 10,000 tweets in response to the Secretary’s six questions related to being a Connected Educator.  Secretary Duncan (@arneduncan) and his Office of Educational Technology (@officeofedtech) deemed October “Connected Educator’s Month” for the second straight year.  To close #ce13, Secretary Duncan used the #edtechchat forum to engage in conversation with educators from all over the world.

In reflecting on the chat, many people asked how to get started, and how to possibly follow such a quick flow of information. For one, 10,000 tweets in an hour is by no means typical; but then again, neither is the opportunity to interact with the US Secretary of Education. Although this particular chat with the Secretary may be an extreme example of what possibilities can arise when connecting with others online, each week there are over 160 chats that occur.  Virtually all topics are covered in some fashion. Whether you’re a 4th grade teacher (#4thchat) in Maryland (#mdedchat), a principal (#cpchat) in Arkansas (#arkedchat), a new teacher (#ntchat) in Rhode Island (#edchatri), or a parent (#ptchat) connecting on a Saturday (#satchat), there’s something for you.

This Quick Start Guide to Participating in Twitter Chats was created as part of the Digital Learning Transition MOOC (#dltmooc), an online “Massive Open Online Course”, developed by The Alliance for Education (@All4Ed) and the Friday Institute (@FridayInstitute) as part of Project 24 (@all4edproject24).  Feel free to download and share the Quick Start resource to help educators get started.

Furthermore, the Official Chat List was created by Chad Evans (@cevans5095) and me (@thomascmurray), with help from our good friend Jerry Blumengarten (@cybraryman1). This resource (shortcut: bit.ly/officialchatlist) is a comprehensive list of the educational Twitter chats that take place each week.

Start small. Choose a chat that peaks your interest. Lurk, listen, and learn. When you’re ready, jump in head first.  Grow your PLN and get connected through a Twitter chat this week!  Your students will benefit.

- See more at: http://www.guide2digitallearning.com/blog_tom_murray/quick_start_guide_twitter_chats#sthash.W1DPfmY1.dpuf

Posted in collaboration and creativity, e-learning, educational technology, information literacy, information technology, instructional technology, learning, mobile devices, mobile learning, MOOC, mooc, online learning, open learning, pedagogy, social media, student-centered learning, technology, technology literacy, Twitter | No Comments »

easy, cheap and cloud-based way to harvest information: beyond Surveymonkey

Posted by Plamen Miltenoff on 16th November 2013

http://mashable.com/2012/02/16/web-form-builders/

8 Web Form Builders for Your Site

1. Google Docs

2. Wufoo - only 3 msgs for free. Just lost one of the five possible stars

3. FormSite

4. FormAssembly

5. Formstack

6. Gravity Forms

7. JotForm

8. reFormed

Posted in educational technology, instructional technology | 1 Comment »

Tablets (iPADs) in the Classroom

Posted by Plamen Miltenoff on 6th November 2013

From: Perry Bratcher [mailto:bratcher@nku.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 9:01 AM
To: ‘lita-l@ala.org’
Cc: Michael Providenti; Michael Wells; Millie Mclemore; Perry Bratcher; Stephen Moon
Subject: [lita-l] RE: Classroom iPads

All – Thanks to each of you for your responses to my email regarding classroom use of iPads (see email at the bottom).  Listed below are is a summary of the comments I received.  I cut/pasted and have reconfigured these comments for this email, so some may be taken out of context.  NOTE: My systems staff have adamantly opposed using the Microsoft Surface.  We have a campus “tech bar” where student/staff can check out new devices for experimentation.  My staff said that the Surface doesn’t work in our particular situation for a variety of reasons and they prefer the iPad tablet option (if we go the tablet route).

Before deciding on implementation of PCs vs. laptops vs. tablet for use in a classroom setting, one needs to consider the motivation for doing so.  Space? Portability? Availability of apps?  Is there a demand for using personal devices for research, etc?  What type of portable device to use (iPad, Microsoft Surface, etc.)

Pros for using iPad/tablets:

  • Keep a few in there to provide examples of how to search on mobile devices.
  • The amount of apps and types of apps out there. Great education apps exist that do not exist elsewhere online or on other platforms (Android or Windows).
  • The iPad is flexible and allows you to regain that floor space you lose with computers and give the user privacy.
  • If setup correctly, the devices can be erased when they are returned so any private data is wiped.
  • Users can download additional apps, even purchase apps if you allow them.
  • They hold a charge much longer then any laptop or ChromeBook on the market.
  • Apple sold 94% of its iPads into education – the reason being that it’s a great education and research tool.
    • Another advantage that I can see boot up time. The iPad is instantly on and connected to the network. Perhaps this most applicable to last-minute library instruction or ad hoc group research?   However, if I had the choice, I would equip a classroom with MacBook Air SSDs
    • Understand how they need to be configured and the tools needed to do so. I created a kit for this not long ago for public libraries: http://www.macprofessionals.com/new-library-ipad-checkout-solution/   Thank you Chris Ross, Macprofessionals
    • UVA has been using iPads for instruction for about 2 years.  They have been very pleased with the results.
    • Our electronic classroom is very small, so we purchased 30 iPads over a year ago to allow teaching in our larger meeting room. There are definitely distinct advantages: flexibility, mobility, lack of technical infrastructure needed (wires, ports, etc.), and the myriad possibilities of apps.

 

Cons for using iPad/tablets:

  • Most mobile devices have not become “workhorse” devices as of yet, so much of the students’ research will still need to be done on a computer.
  • We haven’t seen any advantage to having them either – but our librarians use them sporadically for instruction.
  • Charging, syncing, configuring, Apple ID’s, erasing, cases, restrictions, printing, presenting, etc. For example if you want to present with these, you will need an Apple TV or an adapter. If you want to print you will need AirPrint supported printers or software. If you want to configure and erase you will need a Mac.
  • The challenge I have found is trying to use an inherently personal device in the typical one shot classroom environment. There are lots of things you need to consider. How will they access the wireless? What about taking notes? What about apps that require login? And much more.
  • Someone on staff is equipped and has the time to manage them.
  • We have a pool of 30 loan laptops, recently we have supplemented this with 11 loan iPads. The iPads have generally been very popular but wouldn’t work as a substitute for laptops. As many have mentioned when it comes to getting real work done they are inferior to laptops and people have commented as such.
  • As a complement to laptops though they are great – they are more portable and our nursing students love being able to carry them around and quickly access medical apps, take notes, check calculations etc. I definitely see them as being a valuable resource but if it’s an either/or proposition then I would go on the side of laptops.
  • My personal opinion is that it’s not a bad idea as a supplement to existing systems, but I’d be wary of  replacing more flexible with more limited ones, and am particularly wary of committing to one operating system/vendor (particularly one that tends to charge half-again to twice as much as their competitors with only limited advantages).
  • In a classroom setting (e.g. instruction room) I see little advantage of tablets;  their sole advantage from I can figure out is their portability.   Why force people into a limited device if it is only going to be in one room anyway?

 

Posted in Android, educational technology, information technology, instructional technology, interactive apps, iPAD, mobile apps, mobile apps, mobile devices, mobile learning, technology | No Comments »

Is it appropriate for schools to require that parents buy expensive electronics as school supplies?

Posted by Plamen Miltenoff on 4th November 2013

Is it appropriate for schools to require that parents buy expensive electronics as school supplies? #edtech #edchat http://ow.ly/qtZUy

Around 100 students wait for the library to open before the start of classes each day so that they can get on a computer, he said, and Framingham High is purchasing 400 inexpensive Chromebook laptop computers this year to help give kids more access to technology.

Some school districts have “bring-your-own-device” programs, which encourage students to bring tablets, laptops, or smartphones to school. In those programs, students are typically allowed to work on whatever device they happen to have.

Posted in digital divide, e-learning, ebook, educational technology, mobile devices, mobile learning | No Comments »

10 TWITTER TIPS FOR TEACHERS

Posted by Plamen Miltenoff on 3rd November 2013

http://www.educationreview.co.nz/ict-and-procurement/november-2013/10-twitter-tips-for-teachers/#.UnWbJ_msiM7

10 TWITTER TIPS FOR TEACHERS

1 Use TweetDeck

2 The more you give, the more you get

3 The power of the hashtag

4 Join the #edchatNZ club

5 Focus on following not followers

6 Make use of lists

7 Saving tweets for a rainy day

8 Don’t be a boring tweeter

9 Teaching with Twitter

10 The art of pithiness

Posted in Digital literacy, digital storytelling, educational technology, information literacy, instructional technology, mobile learning, social media, technology literacy, twitter, Twitter | No Comments »