My note: the US News and World Report is behind times on its reporting, unless this article has been held for a while by their editor: teenagers moved from Snapchat as quickly as they moved away from Facebook to Twitter and from Twitter to Snapchat. The generation, which is running US News and World Report is way too slow to notice the nomadic social media moves of the Millennials.
The cited case from Nebraska, Katelyn Gilroy, a library media specialist, who is using Snapchat or school purposes, can undoubtedly have a niche in education, enticing students to learn about their library, reading, etc.
However, it is questionable to present the media specialist’s case from Nebraska as a blank statement; a case, which can be adopted nationwide. Ms. Pannoni fails to mention that since 15 years ago, when instant messaging was the “snapchat” of the times, U.S. students consider these applications their “virtual mall,” where they like to hang out, but are not keen to consider them for educational purposes. In the same fashion, U.S. students are somehow unique in considering Facebook, later Twitter, then Snapchat and now Kik, Yammer, Celly, or Elgg a domain reserved for their private, extracurricular activities.
More about use of social media in education in this IMS blog:
Flipped classroom is an instructional strategy and a type of blended learning that reverses the traditional educational arrangement by delivering instructional content, often online, outside of the classroom.
In essence, “flipping the classroom” means that students gain first exposure to new material outside of class, usually via reading or lecture videos, and then use class time to do the harder work of assimilating that knowledge, perhaps through problem-solving, discussion, or debates.
I have a long way to go in my skill set in making the videos interesting (they, to me anyway, are really boring to watch).
I’m not sure how much they (the videos) are being utilized. There are just certain items that are learned better through direct one on one contact.
I know as I’m teaching, I get direct feedback from my students by looking at their faces and gauging comprehension. I, as a teacher, don’t get that feedback as I’m designing and creating my videos.”
although learning styletheories serve as a justification for different learning activities it does not provide the necessarytheoretical framework as to how the activities need to be structured (Bishop and Verleger, 2013). p. 99
One observation from the literature is there is a lack of consistency of models of the FCM (Davieset al.,2013, p. 565) in addition to a lack of research into student performance, (Findlay-Thompson andMombourquette, 2014, p. 65; Euniceet al., 2013) broader impacts on taking up too much of thestudents’time and studies of broader student demographics. In another literature review of the FCM,Bishop and Verleger concur with the observation that there is a lack of consensus as to the definitionof the method and the theoretical frameworks (Bishop and Verleger, 2013). p. 99
The FCM isheavily reliant on technology and this is an important consideration for all who consideremploying the FCM. p. 101
Gross, B., Marinari, M., Hoffman, M., DeSimone, K., & Burke, P. (2015). Flipped @ SBU: Student Satisfaction and the College Classroom. Educational Research Quarterly, 39(2), 36-52.
we found that high levels of student engagement and course satisfaction characterised the students in the flipped courses, without any observable reduction in academic performance.
Hotle, S. L., & Garrow, L. A. (2016). Effects of the Traditional and Flipped Classrooms on Undergraduate Student Opinions and Success. Journal Of Professional Issues In Engineering Education & Practice, 142(1), 1-11. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000259
It was found that student performance on quizzes was not significantly different across the traditional and flipped classrooms. A key shortcoming noted with the flipped classroom was students’ inability to ask questions during lectures. Students in flipped classrooms were more likely to attend office hours compared to traditional classroom students, but the difference was not statistically significant.
Heyborne, W. H., & Perrett, J. J. (2016). To Flip or Not to Flip? Analysis of a Flipped Classroom Pedagogy in a General Biology Course. Journal Of College Science Teaching, 45(4), 31-37.
Although the outcomes were mixed, regarding the superiority of either pedagogical approach, there does seem to be a trend toward performance gains using the flipped pedagogy. We strongly advocate for a larger multiclass study to further clarify this important pedagogical question.
Tomory, A., & Watson, S. (2015). Flipped Classrooms for Advanced Science Courses. Journal Of Science Education & Technology, 24(6), 875-887. doi:10.1007/s10956-015-9570-8
bibliography on the impact of music on intellectual development.
Does music help learn better? get smarter? advance in life?
keywords: music, education, intelligence.
Misra, S., & Shastri, I. (2015). Pairing Linguistic and Music Intelligence. International Journal Of Multidisciplinary Approach & Studies, 2(5), 32-36.
Costa-Giomi, E. (2015). The Long-Term Effects of Childhood Music Instruction on Intelligence and General Cognitive Abilities. Update: Applications Of Research In Music Education, 33(2), 20-26.
Pelayo, J. M. G., & Galang, E. (2013). Social and Emotional Dynamics of College Students with Musical Intelligence and Musical Training: A Multiple Case Study. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED542664
Neves, V., Tarbet, V. (2007). Instrumental Music as Content Literacy Education: An Instructional Framework Based on the Continuous Improvement Process. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED499123
Conzelmann, K., & Süß, H. (2015). Auditory intelligence: Theoretical considerations and empirical findings. Learning And Individual Differences, 4027-40. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2015.03.029
Juchniewicz, J. (2010). The Influence of Social Intelligence on Effective Music Teaching. Journal Of Research In Music Education, 58(3), 276-293.
Silvia, P. J., Thomas, K. S., Nusbaum, E. C., Beaty, R. E., & Hodges, D. A. (2016). How Does Music Training Predict Cognitive Abilities? A Bifactor Approach to Musical Expertise and Intelligence. Psychology Of Aesthetics, Creativity, And The Arts, doi:10.1037/aca0000058
Rickard, N. S., Bambrick, C. J., & Gill, A. (2012). Absence of Widespread Psychosocial and Cognitive Effects of School-Based Music Instruction in 10-13-Year-Old Students. International Journal Of Music Education, 30(1), 57-78.
Munsey, C. (2006). Music lessons may boost IQ and grades. American Psychological Association, 37(6), 13.
Schellenberg, E. G. (2011). Music lessons, emotional intelligence, and IQ. Music Perception, 29(2), 185-194. doi:10.1525/mp.2011.29.2.185
Kaviani, H., Mirbaha, H., Pournaseh, M., & Sagan, O. (2014). Can music lessons increase the performance of preschool children in IQ tests?. Cognitive Processing, 15(1), 77-84. doi:10.1007/s10339-013-0574-0
Degé, F., Kubicek, C., & Schwarzer, G. (2011). Music lessons and intelligence: A relation mediated by executive functions. Music Perception, 29(2), 195-201. doi:10.1525/mp.2011.29.2.195
Sharpe, N. N. (2014). The relationship between music instruction and academic achievement in mathematics. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A, 75.
keywords: music, education, multimedia.
Crappell, C., Jacklin, B., & Pratt, C. (2015). Using Multimedia To Enhance Lessons And Recitals. American Music Teacher, 64(6), 10-13.
le Roux, I., & Potgieter, H. M. (1998). A Multimedia Approach to Music Education in South Africa.
Ho, W.-C. (2007). Music Students’ Perception of the Use of Multi-Media Technology at the Graduate Level in Hong Kong Higher Education. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8(1), 12–26.
Ho, W. (. (2009). The role of multimedia technology in a Hong Kong higher education music program. Visions Of Research In Music Education, 1337.
Bolden, B. (2013). Learner-Created Podcasts: Students’ Stories with Music. Music Educators Journal, 100(1), 75-80.
Pao-Ta, Y., Yen-Shou, L., Hung-Hsu, T., & Yuan-Hou, C. (2010). Using a Multimodal Learning System to Support Music Instruction. Journal Of Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 151-162.
educators need to figure out what they need to do. Are you trying to have a conversation? Are you simply trying to transmit information? Or are you, in fact, trying to have students create something?
Answer those pedagogical questions first and then – and only then – will you be able to connect people to the kinds of technologies that can do that thing.
The ‘digital native’ is a generational metaphor. It’s a linguistic metaphor. It’s a ridiculous metaphor. It’s the notion that there is a particular generation of people who are fundamentally unknowable and incomprehensible.
There are policy implications: if your university philosophy is grounded in assumptions around digital natives, education and technology, you’re presupposing you don’t have to teach the students how to use tech for their education. And, furthermore, it will never be possible to teach that faculty how to use that technology, either on their own behalf or for their students.
A very different paradigm is ‘visitor and resident‘. Instead of talking about these essentialised categories of native and immigrant, we should be talking about modes of behaviour because, in fact, some people do an awful lot of stuff with technology in some parts of their lives and then not so much in other parts.
How much of your university practice is behind closed doors? This is traditional, of course, gatekeeping our institutions of higher education, keeping the gates in the walled campuses closed. So much of the pedagogy as well as the content of the university is locked away. That has implications not just for potential students but also from a policy perspective – if part of the problem in higher education policy is of non-university people not understanding the work of the university, being open would have really great potential to mitigate that lack of understanding.
I would like to see our universities modelling themselves more closely on what we should be looking for in society generally: networked, open, transparent, providing the opportunity for people to create things that they wouldn’t create all by themselves.
I understand the rationale for gatekeeping, I just don’t think that there’s as much potential with a gatekept system as there is with an open one.
There are two huge problems with the notion of “student expectations”: firstly, the sense that, with the UK’s new fee model, students’ ideas of what higher education should be now weigh much more heavily in the institutions’ educational planning. Secondly, institutions in part think their role is to make their students “employable” because some politician somewhere has said the university is there to get them jobs.
Students coming into higher education don’t know much about what higher education can be. So if we allow student expectations to set the standard for what we should be doing, we create an amazingly low bar.
The point of any educational system is not to provide citizens with jobs. That’s the role of the economy.
Universities are not vocational
Institutions can approach educational technology in two very different ways. They can have a learning technology division that is basically in charge of acquiring and maintaining educational technology. Or they can provide spaces to develop pedagogy and then think about the role of technology within that pedagogy.
“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
Marcin ZaródWhile at the same time in their kung-fu schools they have been using models like “station rotation”, “peer-learning”, “immediate feedback”, mastery learning, even some elements of gamification (like badges-like colour belts showing the mastery on some level and unblocking access to higher-level routines available only for the more advanced students), etc for hundreds of years…. And I am not joking. Just ask anybody who does some kung-fu under the watchful eye of a good coach (sifu).
A great example of a “peer learning” session on the enclosed photo (taken at a kung-fu training in Poland, not in China smile emoticon
China has now reshaped its national exam to focus on a broader range of topics and cognitive skills and, in turn, move away from teacher-dominated lecturing. The new test requires that students employ complex analytical skills, mixed with broader knowledge across various subjects.
the power of VR goes beyond simply recruiting. The University of Michigan uses the technology as a learning tool, and by instituting a virtual reality “cave” they’ve allowed engineering students to interact with virtual structures as they “come together, buckle and collapse.” Instead of relying on physical models—which tend to be large, expensive, and slow to build—a student using the MIDEN VR cave can fly around a virtual structure to study mechanical connections.
