The Honor system is a phenomenon well known in many cultures across the globe and strongly presented in cultures since Ancient Greece and Rome. The concepts of honor and shame have long been associated with cultures in the Mediterranean region mostly because the first scholars to study the social impact of these concepts did so in Southern Europe. Honor has two fundamental components: birth and morality. People could gain or lose their honor by the morality of their conduct. Despite the scholarly emphasis on the Mediterranean, the concept of honor influenced social systems all over the world, and historians are beginning to detect its traces in places as different as China and Africa. The Southern Honor system can firmly be traced back in the European roots and determined to a great degree the American history of the 19th century.
This course will study the geography, history, sociology and religions, cultural and political systems of two worlds and learn to compare the findings. Based on those comparisons, lessons in gender, culture and politics will be drawn.
What is Honor and Shame system and why is it so important to know about it and recognize it
What is the connection between the Honor system in the Mediterranean and in the American South
How does the knowledge of the Honor system aim our daily actions and our global perspective
Course Goals
Students in this course will
Practice research methods and ability to find and evaluate information as well as select reliable information technologies.
Explore applications and technologies for communication and creative collaboration.
Gain practical, hands-on experience with a wide variety of research and online communication tools.
Students will demonstrate ability to research and find academically reliable information from peer-reviewed sources in the online databases, which SCSU is subscribed. Students will demonstrate ability to find and evaluate information from the Internet.
Students will demonstrate competencies in creation of textual and multimedia narratives in individual and collaborative environment.
Students will demonstrate competencies in application of technology toward creation and dissemination of textual and multimedia materials.
Attendance/Discussion Requirements
Attendance is required. If you cannot attend class, it is required to alert the instructor in advance. If the reason for the absence is an emergency, it is expected to approach the instructor and provide an explanation thereafter about the character of the emergency.
Discussion are expected. If you are shy and are hesitant to participate in class, you must compensate with the use of other communication tools (e.g., D2L Discussion List).
Assignment Descriptions
Discussions. You are expected to contribute to each class session with your ideas and your responses to the ideas of your peers. Your comments are expected in class and in between class sessions (using, e.g., D2L discussion list). Your comments must go beyond “yes, I agree,” and “no, I disagree” and provide analysis and synthesis of your thoughts.
Readings – you will be expected to contribute to each class sessions with bibliographical findings on your own.
Written responses – you will be expected to deliver four written responses to peer-reviewed articles related to topics discussed in the class sessions.
Final project – you will be expected to write and present a final project. The written part of the project will be in the realm of 4-5000 words; will adhere to academic research and style; will include a bibliography with at least 2/3 of the sources being peer-reviewed and outside of the 5000 words. The presentation can be of any multimedia form, whereas it will be peer-evaluated, but my (instructor’s) preference will be given to advance multimedia presentations (beyond PPT and using e.g. Prezy, iMovie/Moviemaker movie and/or audio narration)
All assignments should be submitted by midnight of the date on which they are due. Ten percent of an assignment’s point value will be removed for each day an assignment is late. This policy will be adjusted on a case-by-case basis if emergencies prevent you from submitting an assignment on time. In these situations, contact me as soon as is reasonable to determine how this policy can be adjusted in a way that meets your needs and is still fair to other students.
The grade book in D2L will be used to show detailed information about grades in this course. The table below shows the value of each assignment and the total number of points available.
Overall Grade
94% – 100% = A
90 % – 93.99% = A-
86% – 89.99% = B+
83% – 85.99% = B
80% – 82.99% = B-
70% – 79.99% = C
60% – 69.99% = D
59.99% or lower = F
Assignments Schedule
WEEK 1. August 28
Reading[s]:
Peruse through all articles in the D2L content area. Choose one article to your liking and be ready to reflect on it.Assignment[s]:
1. complete entry survey. 2. Prepare to present in coherent and concise manner your understanding of Honors and Shame and discuss the goals for this course. 3. Enter a short essay in the D2L discussion on how do you see applying the knowledge from this course in your future studies, research and work
Introduction. Orientation, class parameters and familiarizing with the syllabus. Questions and issues. Course goals
What is an/the Honor System? Entry Interview (D2L survey is completed and analyzed). Why explore this topic and these vastly different geographic entities (US South and the Mediterranean). Define interest in this class and interest for a project; how this class can help your studies? Your career? All over as a human being?
WEEK 2.Sept 4
Reading[s]:
BUSATTA, S. (2006). Honour and Shame in the Mediterranean. Antrocom, 2(2). 75-78. Retrieved March 19, 2013, from http://www.academia.edu/524890/Honour_and_Shame_in_the_Mediterranean
Moxnes, V. (1996). Honor and Shame. In R. L. Rohrbaugh (Ed.). The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation (pp. 19-40). Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson. http://tinyurl.com/qdvc499. (p. 24-26).
Osiek, C. (2008). Women, honor, and context in Mediterranean antiquity, 64(1), 323–337. doi:10.4102/hts.v64i1.2
Esmer, T. U. (n.d.). Honor in Ottoman and Contemporary Mediterranean Societies: Controversies, Continuities, and New Directions. conference announcement. Retrieved from http://www.h-net.org/announce/show.cgi?ID=196551
Assignment[s]: 1. Find an article on Honor and Shame. 2. Outline in two paragraphs the content of one of the three articles and in a third paragraph compare to your findings; use academic style to log your responses. If you have hesitation about your style, please check with the Write Place, your peers and me.
Why research? Work on the reading material for class
Find articles for the course.
What is academic research? What is a peer-review article? When and how research the Internet. How do I access and keep track of resources.
RefWorks versus Zotero and Mendeley
What is an academic paper. How do I write an academic paper. The Write place.
Making plans: final project
WEEK 3. Sept 11
Reading[s]:
Osiek, C. (2008). Women, honor, and context in Mediterranean antiquity, 64(1), 323–337. doi:10.4102/hts.v64i1.2
Smith, A. (2004). Murder in Jerba: Honour, Shame and Hospitality among Maltese in Ottoman Tunisia. History and Anthropology Routledge, 15(2), 107–132.
Harris, J. W. (2002). Honor, Grace, and War (But Not Slavery?) in Southern Culture. Reviews in American History, 30(1), 1–7. doi:10.2307/30031707
Assignment[s]:
Your first written response is due in the D2L dropbox. Your response must adhere to the requirements of an academic paper, including in-text citation and bibliography.
Honors and Shame from a historical perspective
Do we have a robust theory/notion about the Honor/Shame system through the centuries? Do you think tracking that model through centuries helps in the 21st century? If yes, how and if no, why?
WEEK 4. Sept 18
Reading[s]: Fernand Braudel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernand_Braudel) and the Annales School
Santos, N. F. (2008). Family, Patronage, and Social Contests: Narrative Reversals in the Gospel of Mark. S&J, (2). (footnote p. 200).
Hall, J. L. (1907). Half-hours in southern history. B. F. Johnson publishing co.
Harrell, L. A. (2009, December 4). It’s an honorable choice: Rebellions Against Southern Honor in William Styron’s The Confessions of Nat Turner. Retrieved from http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/resolver/1840.16/2614
Assignment[s]:
Your second written response is due in the D2L dropbox. Your response must adhere to the requirements of an academic paper, including in-text citation and bibliography.
Honors and Shame from a geographic perspective
Is there a “southern” connection (Mediterranean is the European South)? Can be Annale School be right (geography and relief determines history)? To what degree geography and geographical conditions determine such models (Honor/Shame)?
WEEK 5. Sept 25
Reading[s]: Crook, Z. (2009). Honor, Shame, and Social Status Revisited. Journal of Biblical Literature, 128(3), 591–611.
Moxnes, V. (1996). Honor and Shame. In R. L. Rohrbaugh (Ed.). The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation (pp. 19-40). Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson. http://tinyurl.com/qdvc499 (p. 22)
Lever, A. (1986). Honour as a Red Herring. Critique of Anthropology, 6(3), 83–106. doi:10.1177/0308275X8600600305
Assignment[s]:
Your third written response is due in the D2L dropbox. Your response must adhere to the requirements of an academic paper, including in-text citation and bibliography.
Honors and Shame from a cultural perspective. Gender roles, Masculinity
Does the Honor/Shame model help understand gender roles, social status, masculinity etc.?
WEEK 6. Oct 2
Reading[s]:
Crook, Z. (2009). Honor, Shame, and Social Status Revisited. Journal of Biblical Literature, 128(3), 591–611. (p. 593)
Moxnes, V. (1996). Honor and Shame. In R. L. Rohrbaugh (Ed.). The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation (pp. 19-40). Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson. http://tinyurl.com/qdvc499. (p. 26-27; p. 30-33).
Cohen, D. (n.d.). Insult, Aggression, and the Southern Culture of Honor: An “Experimental Ethnography.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5), 945–960.
Harris, J. W. (2002). Honor, Grace, and War (But Not Slavery?) in Southern Culture. Reviews in American History, 30(1), 1–7. doi:10.2307/30031707
Assignment[s]:
Your forth written response is due in the D2L dropbox. Your response must adhere to the requirements of an academic paper, including in-text citation and bibliography.
Honors and Shame from a political and social perspective
Can Honor/Shame be connected with the current political situation in Egypt, Syria, Turkey? Did Honor/Shame system influence decision in American history?
WEEK 7. Wednesday Oct 9
Assignment[s]: final project details
Start working on the final project
Present and discuss your final project: 1. Finalized title 2. Outline 3. Plan 4. Clear work distribution among group members 5. Clear way for peer assessment.
WEEK 8. Wednesday Oct 16
Assignment[s]: details on final project
Final brainstorming and start working on the project
Meeting as a whole: 1. Present group’s plan to class. 2. Share group’s ideas with class. 3. Share technology 4. Share sources 5. Share means for peer assessment
WEEK 9. Wednesday Oct 23
Assignment[s]: draft of bibliography
Class as a whole: peer review and brainstorming
Meeting as a whole: 1. Are sources reliable? 2. Are sources of academic origin (peer-reviewed)? 3. Is the bibliography adhering correctly to the formats (APA, Chicago, ALA)
WEEK 10. Wednesday Oct 30
Assignment[s]: details on presentation
Work on the final project
Meeting as a whole: 1. Presentation format 2. Share technology 3. Share ideas
WEEK 11. Wednesday Nov 6
Assignment[s]: paper draft due in D2L dropbox
Work on final project
Meeting as a whole: share group’s progress and seek other group’s feedback
WEEK 12. Wednesday Nov 13
Assignment[s]: paper draft and presentation
Work on project
Meeting as a whole: share group’s progress and seek other group’s feedback
WEEK 13. Wednesday Nov 20
Assignment[s]: paper draft due in D2L dropbox
Work on project
Meeting as a whole: share group’s progress and seek other group’s feedback
WEEK 13. Wednesday Nov 27
Work on project
Meeting as a whole: share group’s progress and seek other group’s feedback
WEEK 13. Wednesday Dec 4
Assignment[s]: paper final draft due in D2L dropbox
Cohen, D. (n.d.). Insult, Aggression, and the Southern Culture of Honor: An “Experimental Ethnography.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5), 945–960.
Crook, Z. (2009). Honor, Shame, and Social Status Revisited. Journal of Biblical Literature, 128(3), 591–611.
Dussere, E. (2001). The Debts of History: Southern Honor, Affirmative Action, and Faulkner’s Intruder in the Dust. Faulkner Journal, 17(1), 37–57.
Esmer, T. U. (n.d.). Honor in Ottoman and Contemporary Mediterranean Societies: Controversies, Continuities, and New Directions. conference announcement. Retrieved from http://www.h-net.org/announce/show.cgi?ID=196551
Family, Patronage, and Social Contests.pdf. (n.d.).
Hall, J. L. (1907). Half-hours in southern history. B. F. Johnson publishing co.
Harrell, L. A. (2009, December 4). It’s an honorable choice: Rebellions Against Southern Honor in William Styron’s The Confessions of Nat Turner. Retrieved from http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/resolver/1840.16/2614
Harris, J. W. (2002). Honor, Grace, and War (But Not Slavery?) in Southern Culture. Reviews in American History, 30(1), 1–7. doi:10.2307/30031707
Hellerman. (n.d.). Reconstructing Honor in Roman Philippi. Cambridge University Press.
Herzfeld, M. (1980). Honour and Shame: Problems in the Comparative Analysis of Moral Systems. Man, 15(2), 339–351. doi:10.2307/2801675
Honor, Shame, and Social Status.pdf. (n.d.).
honor-04-Antrocom_Honour and Shame in the Mediterranean_S.pdf. (n.d.).
Moxnes, V. (1996). Honor and Shame. In R. L. Rohrbaugh (Ed.). The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation (pp. 19-40). Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson. http://tinyurl.com/qdvc499
Murder in Jerba_ Honour, Shame and.pdf. (n.d.).
Osiek, C. (2008). Women, honor, and context in Mediterranean antiquity, 64(1), 323–337. doi:10.4102/hts.v64i1.2
Women, honor, and context in Mediterranean antiquity.pdf. (n.d.).
Wyatt-Brown, B. & Milbauer, Richard J. (2004). Honor, Shame, and Iraq in American Foreign Policy. In Note prepared for the Workshop on Humiliation and Violent Conflict, Columbia University, New York, November 18-19, 2004. Presented at the Workshop on Humiliation and Violent Conflict, Columbia University, New York,. Retrieved from http://www.humiliationstudies.org/documents/WyattBrownNY04meeting.pdf
e-Education: Systems, Design and Technologies
practices and cases in e-education
systems and technologies in e-education
applications and integration of e-education
e-learning evaluation and content
campus information systems
e-learning technologies, standards and systems
mobile learning
computer aided assessments
knowledge management
virtual learning environments
multimedia in e-learning
marketing and promoting e-learning
social benefits of e-learning
organization learning
technology adoption and diffusion of e-learning
other relative topics
e-Learning: Systems, Design and Technologies
e-Learning platforms
portals and Virtual learning
environments
Course design
Emerging and best practices
Partnerships in e-Learning
Evaluation of e-Learning
Cross-cultural
education
e-Learning strategies
Social benefits of e-Learning
Males participate more frequently in courses taught by female instructors
Other studies show the opposite
Non traditional students participate more frequently
Instructors’ gender also returns mixed results
Class size as variable is important, smaller classes, more participation
Class participation – grading
Make the students grade themselves at the end of each class period. By making them grade themselves, they reflect and makes them more aware of their contribution.
0 – absent
1 – present but did not verbally participate
2 – verbally participated one time
3 – verbally participated more than once
4 – made an equitable contribution to discussion in terms of both quantity and quality
The well-known and established belief that smaller classes spur more participation.
Jay Howard maintain his sociological research in 20th centuries constants: physical classroom, no technology surrounding.
In the 21st century, clickers changed the opportunity for immediate feedback. They changed also the discourse of the traditional student participation and classroom discussion: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=clickers&submit=Search
Traditional forms and techniques for discussion and participation
Weih, T. G. (2015). Discussion Strategies for the Inclusion of ALL Students. Online Submission, http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED561060
Don’ts:
call on student
instructor’s personality issues:
Does the instructor really care of what students have to say
lecturing does not predispose to discussion
The 10 second rule: students discuss in pairs the concept/question
Think-Pair-Share: discussion strategy before or after lesson, similar to 10 second but longer
Quick writes: write their thoughts and then share. Loose paper, names on top,
Recorder-reporter. Post-lecture. The person reps the group, who is working on a specific question. Each group different question.
K-W-L. what we know, what we want to learn, what we learned. Teacher instructs students that K = what they know, W = what they want to learn and L = what they learned. . work in small groups, but each student works on h/er chart, thus if student disagrees with rest of the group, has record. L is left blank for after the discussion.
Simich-Dudgeon, C., & National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education, W. D. (1998). Classroom Strategies for Encouraging Collaborative Discussion. Directions in Language and Education. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED435188
Using storytelling
Chen, W., & Looi, C. (2007). Incorporating Online Discussion in Face to Face Classroom Learning: A New Blended Learning Approach. Australasian Journal Of Educational Technology, 23(3), 307-326. Discussions and participation in hybrid environment
For each OTD topic, the instructor randomly assigns two to four student discussion leaders who are in charge of organizing OTD for the assigned week. Each of the discussion leaders is asked to generate one or two discussion questions related to the topic based on reading assignments. The use of student discussion leaders is a strategy to encourage active participation and help develop ownership of learning. Once student discussion leaders post their questions, other students are encouraged to contribute to the discussion by answering each question, commenting on the ideas of others, or asking questions of peers or the instructor for the next two days. When the week’s discussion is complete, the student leaders and instructor work together to summarize the discussion and evaluate each student’s participation and contribution to the discussion using a scoring rubric. (p.242)
Implementation (p. 243):
preparation : On the first day of the course, the instructor introduces topics, how-tos, expectations, grading procedures, and required reading assignments for OTD, and organizes discussion leaders for each online discussion (2–4 leaders for each)
Opening and Responding: Posted discussion questions become open at the time of the class and students who are not the leaders are required to post at least one response per question within 48 hrs. During this time, the leaders facilitate discussion by responding to comments, raising questions, or redirecting discussion to encourage active participation and ensure the discussion is on track
Summary and Assessment: The job of the leader is to moderate, summarize discussion threads, and assess them at the end of the discussion. When the week’s discussion is complete, the leaders meet with the instructor to debrief and evaluate each student’s participation and contribution to the discussion using a scoring rubric given by the instructor. After the meeting, each leader posts his or her summary of the discussion to BBCMS and reports at the next in-person class.
D2L
Beyond CMS (D2L)
Discussions and participation in online environment
Darabi, A., Liang, X., Suryavanshi, R., & Yurekli, H. (2013). Effectiveness of Online Discussion Strategies: A Meta-Analysis. American Journal Of Distance Education, 27(4), 228-241. doi:10.1080/08923647.2013.837651
Beyond CMS (D2L)
Lin, P., Hou, H., Wang, S., & Chang, K. (2013). Analyzing knowledge dimensions and cognitive process of a project-based online discussion instructional activity using Facebook in an adult and continuing education course. Computers & Education, 60(1), 110-121. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.017 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131512001819
111 results suggest that using Facebook is not necessarily harmful to a student’s learning performance. Adequate learning activity design and pedagogical goal setting could, in fact, exploit the social and information-sharing function of Facebook, thereby supporting academic learning (Gray et al., 2010). this study seeks to advance the understanding of adult learners’ behaviors in online project discussions using Facebook.
In the process of project-based learning, learners must utilize different kinds of knowledge (e.g., discrete declarative knowledge and dynamic procedural knowledge) (Lou, 2004). Meanwhile, students can develop higher level of cognitive skills for a specific domain as well as the ability to apply adequate knowledge to a specific domain or context during PBL (Barron et al., 1998; Blumenfeld et al., 1991).
118 Select driving questions or controversial issues as project topics: Blumenfeld et al. (1991) noted that driving questions could facilitate students to explore the project topic. In the exploration process, students must first collect information and propose diverse viewpoints on the project topics. They could subsequently filter out and reach consensus during online discussions. This process involves diverse and converging phases that can move students toward higher-order thinking (Jorczak & Bart, 2009).
Allow ample time for online discussion: Results of this study indicated that student online discussions lacked diversity in both knowledge and cognitive process dimensions. One possible reason could be that the allotted time for online discussions was not sufficient. Considering the multiple roles that adult learners play in family and/or work, they may not be able to respond to the discussions in a timely manner. Therefore, allowing more time for students to discuss may provide opportunities for students to demonstrate more diverse and deeper thinking (Scherling, 2011).
Provide a structured rubric for online discussions: Well-designed discussion guidelines and evaluation criteria, i.e., posting protocols or rubric for grading, could serve as scaffolds for student online discussions, which may, subsequently, lead to more meaningful learning (Gilbert & Dabbagh, 2005). Following that, more diverse type of knowledge and levels of cognitive process could be expected to be shown.
Pay attention to the effects that individual differences may exert on the learner’s interactions: Our results showed that, in the context of online discussions, females and older learners are more likely to have off-topic discussions than their male and/or younger counterparts. These findings are in accord with previous research that suggested effects of individual differences on learning as well as on the use of SNSs (Glynn et al., 2012; Muscanell & Guadagno, 2012; Price, 2006; Yukselturk & Bulut, 2009). Therefore, considering the potential effects that gender and age may exert on online discussions, instructors are advised to consider individual differences when grouping students for online discussions, as a balanced group composition of evenly distributed age and gender could be a better approach than a skewed distribution of individuals.
social interaction, which was considered as irrelevant discussion, may also leading to meaningful thinking and echoes the viewpoints from previous studies, which suggest social interaction can be a critical element in the CSCL environment (Abedin et al., 2011a, 2011b).
Incorporating online discussion in face to face classroom learning: A new blended learning approach
Wenli Chen, Chee-Kit Looi
Abstract
This paper discusses an innovative blended learning strategy which incorporates online discussion in both in-class face to face, and off-classroom settings. Online discussion in a face to face class is compared with its two counterparts, off-class online discussion as well as in-class, face to face oral discussion, to examine the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed strategy. By integrating online discussion into the flow of the classroom, learners are given dedicated time to foster a habit of critical thinking, reflection and articulating these online, which can subsequently seed further in-class oral discussions, and off-class online discussions. It is found that in-class, online discussion can provide a wider spectrum of discussion perspectives, equalise participation in discussion, and promote cognitive thinking skills and in depth information processing. However, the lack of face to face interactions and the need for sufficient time to do online postings pose challenges in implementing online discussion for face to face classroom learning.
EASI Webinar part 1: Making Media Accessible by Adding Captions and Audio
Presenter: Susanne Van Dorpe Mistric, Instructor/Coordinator Distance Learning – Individualized Learning Center Wade Technical Community College
Monday Feb. 1 at 11 Pacific, noon Mountain, 1 Central and 2 PM Eastern
Susanne provides beginner-level training for WTCC staff on adding captions and audio description to Media. The goal is to take people with little technical skill in how to create descriptions of audio content and then synchronize it with the media. Students also need to be aware of how ane when to add audio descriptions as well
EASI Webinar part 2: Making Media Accessible by Adding Captions and Audio
Presenter: Susanne Van Dorpe Mistric, Instructor/Coordinator Distance Learning – Individualized Learning Center Wade Technical Community College
Monday Feb. 8 at 11 Pacific, noon Mountain, 1 Central and 2 PM Eastern
Susanne provides more advanced-level training for WTCC staff who already have the basic awareness of accessibility and familiarity with the tools to provide this. This will enhance their awareness of how and when to add accessible features especially to meet the requirements of content in more advanced courses.
“According to the study, U.S. educators believe technology’s potential for distraction will wane as digital culture and infrastructure mature in the next five years, giving way to other concerns like privacy and security in 2020,” according to a news release. “However, these present and future apprehensions don’t stop many U.S. educators from allowing personal electronics in their classrooms. U.S. teachers have a higher tolerance for personal devices in the classroom than do British and Australian teachers. In fact, the study shows that 48 percent of U.S. educators say students can bring technology to class for educational purposes, and one in seven U.S. educators allows any electronic device as long as it doesn’t distract other students.”
From the Blended and Online Learning discussion list:
We’re working on a grant program at my unit to improve these lec-capture courses. One of the ways is to train faculty:
We’ve seen that these courses have very little student engagement, especially for online students for whom this is the main medium of instruction. It’s challenging for the instructors to keep the online student in mind as they teach their lec-capture class. This is not surprising, since they’re essentially being asked to teach 2 different audiences simultaneously – in class and online. However, given that this is not going to change in the near future for us, we’ve begun exploring ways to train faculty to do a better job given the constraints. Below are some ideas:
We are in the process of creating a sort of “checklist” to address things that can be done before, during, and after the class and ways of streamlining the process.
BEFORE
Make faculty familiar with the technology – do tours of rooms, tutorials, short workshops, etc.
Syllabus, Schedule and instructional materials are prepared before the semester begins.
Learning objectives, outcomes, and assessments are aligned and made transparent to the students.
Design pedagogy that is inclusive – for e.g., move discussions online, create groups that include in-class and online students, use language that directly addresses online students, etc.
DURING & at the END
Review a sampling of videos at the beginning, middle, and end by ourselves and then with the faculty and provide them feedback on the good, the bad, and the ugly – very discreetly. 🙂 It’s going to be a sort of a joint reflection on the class. We believe if we do this a few times with the faculty, they’ll get the message and will make greater effort to include the online student in their instruction. And doing it 3 times will also make visible the changes and progress they make (or not)
We also plan to survey the students at the beginning, middle, and at the end of the semester and share the results with the faculty.
Chunking of videos includes preplanning and post production tasks. Faculty can be trained to script their lectures more, create lecture based on “topics” to make chunking and tagging easier. Need to focus on end user experience (online student).
These are some of the ideas. We plan to start implementing them this summer. I’ll share with you our progress. 🙂
Rema
———————————————————–
Rema Nilakanta, Ph.D.
Director of Design & Delivery|
Engineering-LAS Online Learning
1328 Howe Hall
515-294-9259 (office)
515-294-6184 (fax) http://www.elo.iastate.edu
—————————-
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Nilakanta, Rema [ELO] <rema@iastate.edu> wrote:
Good Morning!
Thank you all for filling out the survey on the use of lecture capture in higher education. I appreciate your time and interest in this subject.
Attached are the results. I’ve also provided an overview below. The main purpose of this survey was to get an overall idea of how lecture capture is used in HE. I was just curious to see if the way we use it is pretty much similar at other institutions. The finding was inconclusive. My next step is to dig a little deeper – perhaps repurpose this survey for faculty and students. The final goal is to improve these courses – make them as pedagogically sound as possible, given that this technology is here to stay at our campus, at least for the near future. It will certainly require designing faculty training, but I would also like to explore innovative and efficient ways of chunking lecture videos pre and post production.
Let me know if you have any questions or need further information.
Rema
OVERVIEW OF “USE OF LECTURE CAPTURE IN HE” SURVEY RESULTS & FINDINGS
I’ve listed some of the findings that impressed me. They do not follow the order of the questions in the survey. For details, please view the attached report.
Just a quick note – There were 39 respondents, but not all responded to every question. The respondents included instructional and IT support staff and administrators at all levels generally from 4-year public and private universities.
FINDINGS & THEMES
Echo 365 and Panopto are the most frequently used lecture capture systems, but Adobe Connect also has several users.
The computer screen and the instructor feed are most commonly captured (89% and 79%, respectively). However, some also capture the document camera, the whiteboard, and the graphics pen tablet (53%, 39%, and 32%, respectively).
Almost every one (97%) report that they support their recordings with additional course materials in an LMS, while many also use web conferencing to deliver lectures and hold office hours. A sizeable portion of respondents also use online textbooks and publisher sites in their course delivery. Only 18% use lecture capture as the primary means of course delivery.
The majority of respondents use full class recordings of an hour or more, while around half also use short segments of 20 minutes or less.
The majority of the respondents seem to indicate a campus wide use of lecture capture for different purposes:
o review of in-class lectures
o training and advising
o student presentations (students use the technology to create their presentations/demos/assignments)
o live streaming of seminars and on-site hosting of conferences for remote students and audiences.
Size of the support units ranged from 1 person to 150+ people spread across campus.
Similarly, there was a wide range for the number of courses that used lecture capture – as few as 1-2 to a 1000 and more, if one takes into account non-traditional uses.
Although the numbers show that a majority (77%) provide full IT support for their lecture capture systems, a closer look at the comments indicates there is a general tendency toward making faculty more self reliant by providing them support when requested, or providing them with fully equipped and automated rooms, personal capture solutions and/or training.
Majority seemed satisfied with the lecture capture setup, so did the students. However, it seemed that the knowledge about student satisfaction was more anecdotal than formal. Other observations include:
o For people satisfied with the setup, there were quite a few users of Echo 360 and Panopto.
o Panopto seemed to rise above the rest for its promptness and quality of service. Mediasite got mixed response.
o There seems to be an awareness of the need to get the lectures captioned.
o Along with automated lecture capture technology, there seems to be a rise in old ways of doing things – manual (human) recording of events continues and seems preferable, especially in the face of rising costs of lecture capture technology.
The top 5 challenges concerning faculty support can be summarized as follows:
o Training faculty to use the technology – turn on the mic, no recording of white board, do not change settings, take time to learn the technology.
o Funding and support
o Ensuring best practices
o Captioning
o IP concerns
Efforts to address these challenges were related to:
OPERATIONS
– Keep mic on all the time
– Use of media asset management systems, like Kaltura (MediaSite)
– Admins trained to check settings for rooms
– Disable download of recordings as default setting (addressed IP concerns)
TRAINING
– Create user groups around technologies
– Promote communication among instructors using a particular room
– Training of faculty by instructional design teams on the use of technology and best practices
Our expert panelists weigh in on education technology to give us their verdict on which approaches to tech-enabled learning will have a major impact, which ones are stagnating and which ones might be better forgotten entirely.
Social Media for Teaching and Learning: Lukewarm to Hot
Digital Badges: Mostly Lukewarm
Open Educational Resources (OERs): Mostly Hot
E-Portfolios: Losing Steam
Learning Management Systems (LMS): Lukewarm to Hot
Flipped Learning: Mostly Hot (but Equitability a Question)
Blended Learning: Unanimously Hot
Student Data Privacy Concerns: Unanimously Hot
Apps for Learning: A Mostly Lukewarm Mixed Bag
Games for Learning: Hot
What are the hot devices?
Cameras like the Canon VIXIA, the Sony HDR-MV1 or the Zoom Q4 or Q8 range from $200 to $400. The secret of these small devices is a tradeoff between video flexibility and audio power. With digital-only zoom, these cameras still deliver full HD video (or better) but with limited distance capabilities. In return, the audio quality is unsurpassed by anything short of a professional boom or wireless microphone setup; most of these cameras feature high-end condenser microphone capsules that will make music or interview recordings shine.
The Chromebook is hot. Seventy-two percent of Chromebook sales were education-related purchases in 2014.
The smartphone is hot. Every day, the smartphone becomes less of a “phone” and more of a device for connecting with others via social media, researching information on the Internet, learning with apps and games and recording experiences with photos and videos.
Here are some questions that will assist in determining if engagement is leading to actual learning:
• Is the technology being integrated in a purposeful way, grounded in sound pedagogy?
• What are the learning objectives or outcomes?
• Are students demonstrating the construction of new knowledge? Are they creating a learning product or artifact?
• How are students applying essential skills they have acquired to demonstrate conceptual mastery?
• What assessments (formative or summative) are being used to determine standard attainment?
• How are students being provided feedback about their progress toward the specific learning objectives or outcomes?
• Is there alignment to current observation or evaluation tools?
Infuse Learning
Infuse Learning is a tablet-based student response system for learning through conversation and collaboration. Teachers can build assessments and track students’ responses. The drawing-response tool (for sketches and diagrams) is a powerful feature here. Also, there’s native-language support for English learners. Read full review.
Kahoot
Kahoot is a game-based classroom response system. Teachers can create quizzes using content from the web. Questions appear on a class screen; without needing an account, students answer in real-time on a mobile device. Kahoot is different in that it creates an engaging competition. Students can also create their own quizzes and assessments. Read full review.
Socrative
Socrative is a student response system with a variety of activities: quizzes, assessments, games, and even exit notes. Teachers control the flow of exercises; students respond in real time. It generates reports to help teachers track learning over time. Read full review.
Turnitin
Turnitin is mostly a tool for promoting originality in students’ writing (or catching plagiarism). However, it’s also a tool to support the writing process — from teacher feedback and grading to peer evaluation and review. There’s also a handy discussion forum feature, with built-in moderation. Read full review.
Poll Everywhere
Poll Everywhere isn’t just for schools, but works well as a classroom response system. Students can respond via text message, Twitter, or a Web browser; teachers can project the results on the Web, or in a PowerPoint or Keynote presentation. Read full review.
TodaysMeet
TodaysMeet is a backchannel to help an audience and presenter connect in real time. Like a closed version of Twitter, posts are limited to 140 characters. Teachers can offer students a live stream for discussion, addressing issues on-the-spot, or as an after-lecture reflective activity. Read full review.
Backchannel Chat
Backchannel Chat is just for educational use. Students don’t have to enter any personal information into the system, and teachers can save, search, and archive discussions. Teachers also get a lot of control with customizable moderation options, a room-locking feature, and filtering for unwelcome content. Read full review.
GoSoapBox
is a student response system offering teachers more than a standard quiz/poll tool. The social Q&A feature allows students to vote the most relevant questions to the top, and a “Confusion Barometer” tool lets teachers track understanding throughout a lesson. Read full review.
Blendspace
Blendspace allows teachers to collect resources from the web and create a customizable, blended-instruction experience for students. Formative assessment tools are built in, allowing multiple question types, and the ability to track students’ progress over time. Read full review.
Collaborize Classroom
Collaborize Classroom allows teachers to create an online classroom community for learning — a home-base for online discussion forums, polls, assessments, and student-driven projects. There are differentiation tools and customized learning opportunities for individuals and small groups. Read full review.
Quizizz is an alternative to Kahoot, and there’s also a lot for educators to like. It is very similar to Kahoot, with a few key differences.
Just like Kahoot, the teacher (or student host) chooses a quiz to begin. A five digit game code is provided. Players point their browsers to join.quizzizz.com and input the game code, along with their names. If players are using smartphones or tablets, I display the join link as a QR code.
Quizizz takes a different approach. No projector is necessary becauseplayers see questions and answer options on their own screens. The question order is randomized for each student, so it’s no easy for players to cheat. With Quizizz, players don’t have to wait for the whole class to answer a question before they continue to the next one.
So, Quizizz is player-paced while Kahoot’s pace is determined by the teacher or host. This is the major difference and can be a benefit or a drawback. If you want to pause after each question, then Kahoot is better. The class can stop and discuss after each question, immediately addressing misconceptions. With Quizizz, players zip through questions at their own pace, limiting all discussion to after all questions have been answered.
As for learning, our survey indicated that students used smartphones (77 percent) and tablets (79 percent) for academic reasons. When asked how often their instructors required a mobile device, there was a significant drop-off for smartphones (19 percent) and tablets (13 percent). This reveals a missed opportunity for instructors to engage with students in a way that is familiar to them. – See more at: http://blog.canvaslms.com/like-it-or-not-students-love-their-mobile-devices-for-learning#sthash.ztx8ousF.cvgdnuFI.dpuf
