Padlet Possibilities – Using Their Phones to Keep Their Attention in Class Presenters: Kathy Magee and Paul Phillips, Faculty, Occupational Health and Safety, Northern Alberta Institute of Technology Summary: Tired of fighting your students’ phones for their attention? Maybe it’s because the phone is more interesting than the lesson (or worse, than you). Why not use those phones to encourage participation in the day’s classroom activities and keep the on the learning and lessons you have planned. This session will have participants using their Ipads, tablets, and phones to access Padlet in order to identify, discuss, and adapt ways that this free software can be used in multi-disciplines.
Using PBL, and Active and Collaborative Techniques in Science Teaching Presenter: Stamatis Muratidis, Faculty, Chemistry, Palo Alto College, TX Summary: Participants interested in tips for successfully involving students by developing Active and Collaborative Learning (ACL) techniques will be engaged by use of a variety of topics, models and tools. Most of the workshop will take place in a collaborative group format and best practices for forming, molding and nurturing collaborative groups will be emphasized. Along the way the presenter will be promoting data-driven best practices, while identifying and mitigating some of the common pitfalls of implementing PBL and ACL activities.
Relax, Reflect, Relate: 3 R’s of Contemplative Practice Presenter: William H. Johnson, Jr., Student Success Coordinator/Personal Development Coach, University of North Carolina, Greensboro, NC Summary: Is life moving too fast? Are you busy beyond belief? Well, slow down! Would you attend a session that allows you to take the time to relax and be still, reflect on your life, and relate your thoughts and feelings to others? If you answered “yes” to at least one of these questions, then this workshop is for you. Research has shown that people applying some type of contemplative practice in their lives are likely to be more engaged, and are healthier and happier in life. Attendees in this session will participate in two forms of contemplative practice – meditation and reflective writing – that enhance personal growth. By the end of the session, you will learn strategies to quiet the mind, engage the spirit, and connect with others!
Study Smarter, Not Just Harder! Presenter: Amy Munson, Director of Instructional Design, United States Air Force Academy Summary: The United States Air Force Academy Science of Teaching and Learning program is conducting a study on how students learn about their own learning. The research team hypothesizes that students learn more from peers than from “outsiders” such as faculty members and has set out to develop a peer training and messaging program alongside a faculty training and messaging program using the same three highly successful learning/self-management strategies. On Course structures and strategies were implemented for the training components as researchers shared the benefits of practice testing, spaced practice and successive relearning as defined in Dunlosky and Rawson’s meta-analysis of learning strategies. This workshop will give participants an opportunity to learn more about those three strategies while also learning about how to implement a student “train the trainer” program.
and about 20 articles from the link above with the general search:
Record: 1
A Digital Badging Dataset Focused on Performance, Engagement and Behavior-Related Variables from Observations in Web-Based University Courses By: McDaniel, Rudy; Fanfarelli, Joseph R.. British Journal of Educational Technology, v46 n5 p937-941 Sep 2015. (EJ1071635)
Database:
ERIC
Record: 2
A Student-Centered Guest Lecturing: A Constructivism Approach to Promote Student Engagement By: Li, Lei; Guo, Rong. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, v15 Oct 2015. (EJ1060070)
Full Text from ERIC
Database:
ERIC
Record: 3
Creating Effective Student Engagement in Online Courses: What Do Students Find Engaging? By: Dixson, Marcia D.. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, v10 n2 p1-13 Jun 2010. (EJ890707)
Full Text from ERIC
Engaging Students in Online Courses By: Jacobs, Pearl. Research in Higher Education Journal, v26 Oct 2014. (EJ1055325)
Full Text from ERIC
Database:
ERIC
Record: 6
Engaging Students via Social Media: Is It Worth the Effort? By: Mostafa, Rania B.. Journal of Marketing Education, v37 n3 p144-159 Dec 2015. (EJ1080980)
Database:
ERIC
Record: 7
Engaging Students with Social Media By: Bal, Anjali S.; Grewal, Dhruv; Mills, Adam. Journal of Marketing Education, v37 n3 p190-203 Dec 2015. (EJ1081047)
Database:
ERIC
Record: 8
HOW TO BETTER ENGAGE ONLINE STUDENTS WITH ONLINE STRATEGIES. By: BRITT, DR. MARGARET. College Student Journal. Fall2015, Vol. 49 Issue 3, p399-404. 6p.
Database:
EBSCO MegaFILE
Record: 9
Instructor scaffolding for interaction and students’ academic engagement in online learning: Mediating role of perceived online class goal structures. By: Cho, Moon-Heum; Cho, YoonJung. Internet & Higher Education. Apr2014, Vol. 21, p25-30. 6p. DOI: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.008.
Database:
EBSCO MegaFILE
Record: 10
Measuring Student Engagement in an Online Program By: Bigatel, Paula; Williams, Vicki. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, v18 n2 Sum 2015. (EJ1065381)
Database:
ERIC
Record: 11
Measuring Student Engagement in the Online Course: The Online Student Engagement Scale (OSE) By: Dixson, Marcia D.. Online Learning, v19 n4 Sep 2015. (EJ1079585)
Full Text from ERIC
Database:
ERIC
Record: 12
On-Line Course Development: Engaging and Retaining Students By: Bruster, Benita G.. SRATE Journal, v24 n2 p1-7 Sum 2015. (EJ1083122)
Full Text from ERIC
Database:
ERIC
Record: 13
Promoting Online Students’ Engagement and Learning in Science and Sustainability Preservice Teacher Education By: Tomas, Louisa; Lasen, Michelle; Field, Ellen. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, v40 n11 Article 5 Nov 2015. (EJ1083370)
Full Text from ERIC
Database:
ERIC
Record: 14
Strengthening student engagement: what do students want in online courses? By: Chakraborty, Misha; Nafukho, Fredrick Muyia. European Journal of Training & Development. 2014, Vol. 38 Issue 9, p782-802. 21p. DOI: 10.1108/EJTD-11-2013-0123.
Database:
EBSCO MegaFILE
Record: 15
Student Engagement in Online Learning: What Works and Why. ASHE Higher Education Report. Nov2014, Vol. 40 Issue 6, p1-14. 14p. DOI: 10.1002/aehe.20018.
Database:
EBSCO MegaFILE
Record: 16
Student Perceptions of Twitters’ Effectiveness for Assessment in a Large Enrollment Online Course By: Rohr, Linda; Costello, Jane. Online Learning, v19 n4 Sep 2015. (EJ1079590)
Full Text from ERIC
The civic-social media disconnect: exploring perceptions of social media for engagement in the daily life of college students. By: Mihailidis, Paul. Information, Communication & Society. Oct2014, Vol. 17 Issue 9, p1059-1071. 13p. DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.877054.
Database:
EBSCO MegaFILE
Record: 19
The Online University Classroom: One Perspective for Effective Student Engagement and Teaching in an Online Environment By: Carr, Marsha. Journal of Effective Teaching, v14 n1 p99-110 2014. (EJ1060450)
Full Text from ERIC
Database:
ERIC
Record: 20
The Perils of a Lack of Student Engagement: Reflections of a “Lonely, Brave, and Rather Exposed” Online Instructor By: Stott, Philip. British Journal of Educational Technology, v47 n1 p51-64 Jan 2016. (EJ1086712)
Database:
ERIC
Record: 21
The VIRI (Virtual, Interactive, Real-Time, Instructor-Led) Classroom: The Impact of Blended Synchronous Online Courses on Student Performance, Engagement, and Satisfaction By: Francescucci, Anthony; Foster, Mary. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, v43 n3 p78-91 2013. (EJ1018277)
Full Text from ERIC
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.
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?
the heart of the student engagement myth: that adding or changing classroom elements, doing a new project, or exposing a student to a new technology or method of instruction will magically transform apathy into a white-hot fire of curiosity.
True engagement comes when a teacher knows a student’s strengths and interests beyond the classroom and uses that knowledge to deepen relationships. If we go into our rooms each day to teach but not connect, we can’t expect students to care beyond a test score, if that.
Can you answer these questions about your students? If you can, how do you apply that knowledge to connect with them?
*What home issues are affecting their work?
*Do they have a non-academic passion?
*What are their favorite shows, games, songs, or books?
*Do they have a preferred learning style?
*What is their hidden talent?
*What goals do they have for themselves in the future?
My note: easily said then done; if the instructor is overloaded with 4 classes 100 students per class, the suggestion above is rendered useless.
Empowerment – Do this because you have the power to do something meaningful for yourself.
So if we want to get to this idea of “empowering” our students, we are not going to have to be the “sage on the stage” or the “guide at the side”, but “architects of meaningful learning opportunities”. Understanding our students, their interests, abilities, and strengths, will help us better design learning that gets them to, as Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi describes, a state of “flow“.
Flow is the mental state of operation in which a person performing an activity is fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and enjoyment in the process of the activity
“I’d really rather work alone. . .” Most of us have heard that from a student (or several students) when we assign a group project, particularly one that’s worth a decent amount of the course grade. It doesn’t matter that the project is large,…
we train students to join the workforce. Team work is key. None of this lone wolf , inner child stuff. You cant be a nurse, a plant worker, someone in business unless you can teamwork……….
if you want to be an academic , even then you have others in your department , you teach . whether they are shy, introverted makes no difference. We humans are a pack type animal.
You can make all the esoteric analogies you want. But in this world , its a we world not an I one.
Professor (Adjunct) at Manchester Community College
With the demographics that I work with, I do not feel that group projects are particularly productive. One thing we must always be sure of before assigning a group project is whether or not doing so supports the objective of the course. That said, a mandatory group project might not be appropriate, say, in an accounting class, where group dynamics and playing well with others is not particularly a focus of the class objective.
For business classes, I give the option of group vs. individual project – but make it clear that the expectation multiplies by the number of group members. Our students work different schedules and all commute to class – the logistics alone can be overwhelming. Who’s going to watch the kids and the dogs?
Historically, group projects can be particularly overly stressful for students requiring accommodations and/or are living with physiological or mental health issues. When a group project is assigned, it is incumbent upon the instructor to ensure any such issues are addressed.
Assigning a group project now also makes us responsible for ensuring that the group functions appropriately, and the role of each group member is clearly identified so that you are able to assess performance. “Free riders” are an inherent reality in group projects, and as with public goods, someone still has to pay the price. (I have used a group project in an economics class – with a student “plant” to demonstrate the “free rider.”)
Overall, I feel that group projects should only be assigned in a controlled structured environment, otherwise someone will always feel left out. I use scheduled group projects only in classes where doing so meets a course objective, as I feel this is fairest to all of the students.
No doubt the ‘lone wolf’ phenomenon is real, and we as educators have created it. Our educational system has reinforced to students that individual performance is supreme, and that is how they have generally been judged. Students have spent years polishing their capabilities to excel individually, and then suddenly we are saying that they need to not only work effectively in teams, but also figure out how to push team efforts to an excellent level so that their individual grade does not suffer due to below-average performance by other team members. So, first we need to be more consistent in our message(s) to students. We should be talking about critical professional skills (higher-level thinking, problem solving, communication, and teamwork) from the time they enter our university. And our curricula and courses should be designed to help them develop these skills. In the meantime, we should do all that we can to help them be successful in their new and unfamiliar teamwork roles. One way I have tried to reduce surprises and conflicts is to require student teams to develop a team charter before they commence any work. A charter lays out goals and methods for the team, along with expectations for team members and agreement on how conflicts will be resolved. I have students start at this link to learn about the benefits and structure of team charters: http://www.clarosgroup.com/jumpstart.pdf.
Adjunct Lecturer at Asia Pacific International University
I was one of those students who hated group work. The reason for me at least was because the group would slow me down. Often when people work in groups accountability goes down and people go off task. I remember being in groups were nobody wanted to do the assignment but wanted to socialize. In the real world this is not as bad because people are being employed and paid money so they have some motivation to work together.
Sadly, there are times were students need to work in groups. However, if I have a student who insist on working alone I tried to make accommodations for them because that student used to be me.
Associate Professor , Anatomic and Clinical Pathology at King Abdulaziz University
Top Contributor
I agree with Alan that team projects should be chosen only if they are required to support the ILOs.However although the course may or may not require the team project we should keep in mind that all graduates are sooner or latter going to work outside the institution with people whom they dont know at all.If they are not encouraged to deal with their own familiar peers (at a relatively more flexible stage of their lives) I dont see how we can expect them to demonstrate standard collegiality later on in their careers.So I think team projects do groom our students with culture, grace , dignity and respect above all.It fosters life long professional relationships in which the team members become invested in each others ” development and well-being”
Yes! a serious challenge to team project is that of ” free riders” because they can potentially annoy and de- motivate delligent students.In my experience there has always been a note of caution in using “team projects ” since team’s performance is difficult to implement which I suppose is about ” performance mangement”.
This can be addressed by choosing the right design for the project that should be designed in a way that individual efforts are observable and measurable keeping the number of students to small.There are different models of team projects .I think “additive tasks where the individual inputs are added together so that the group productivity is determined by the individual contributions of all group members” are the best .The monitoring can be done by the direct supervision of the facilitator or by peers. We may also indirectly stress the potential for reputational consequences for poor individual effort that may work into motivating their engagement next time.
Team composition is an important determinant of team performance. Allowing teams to form autonomously with like-minded individuals who have self-selected into the team knowing who they will be working with are likely to perform better.But as an educator I have experienced that learning outcomes are better met with heterogeneity within the team.
Other way of engaging ” free riders” into teams is by using a mechanism to make the P & P well known to all students at the begining and by continuous monitoring of effort so that at the end they could share in a reward only if there is substantial evidence that they have worked hard enough to deserve it.
1. complicated schedules. I generate groups with catme.org, which will take into account parameters that you determine (schedules, grades, etc.), allowing you to say what should and should not match, and how important it is, in order to come up with groups. I often modify the groups based on what I know of the individuals, but the main thing they help with is sorting the schedules. There is a catme users group on Linked In.
2. loafers. When I grade a group project, 1/3 of the grade is the overall project (and each member of the group gets the same grade), 1/3 is for the individuals’ performance (in presentation, answering questions, etc.) and 1/3 of the grade is peer grades. Every student grades the other members of the group. My assessment of the students’ contrubutions, and their peers’ assessment, is usually very close, but being allowed to grade their co-workers gives the student a little bit of feeling of input that helps to deal with the feeling of unfairness in being burdened with an uncooperative group member.
my group projects , except for one, are all where i can observe.
that being said i hear every semester the “i work better alone or it’s not fair to grade me with a group”
inevitably i ask them what “field” they are going into? we don’t need sole workers in the fields we ready them for.
1. the entire group gets the same grade.
2. all the groups , usually 4 or 5 of 4 or 5 students each, grade each other by student and by group.
3. everyone has same instructions……build a model for the physical folks, make an oral presentation ,3 to 5 minutes each student, in front of entire class and me, and bring it all together with a written report on the subject of a minimum of 20 pages for a C grade.
One of our Profs adds this little tidbit……..if after 2 weeks into the 5 week assignment, the team wants to remove someone for lack of commitment or participation, they can vote them off the team.
BUT they all have to put that in writing AND say why……….AND SIGN IT
the tossed student can then do the entire project all by themselves………BUT they lose one grade. so from an A to a B for example. WHY? it’s a team project and they know it ahead of time……
this isn’t Burger King and NO you can’t have everything YOUR own way in work either….
the other students are harsher graders then i usually turn out to be to….
I have to admit I never liked team projects at first. I would be one that would rather do it myself and on my time, but with the way the world is today that is not a good idea anymore. You have to be able to work on virtual teams. Employers want to know that students have that skill. I always have the teams fill out an evaluation that I only read on their team members.
Former Professor at Georgia College & State University
Mary Bisson’s recognition of two flaws of group work, coordinating schedules and accounting for those who “loaf” through the project, is very real. I hated college committees for a third reason: conflicting learning styles (I’m being polite about the clashes). Some need reflection and contemplation before decision-making, others need visual prompts to facilitate understanding, and still others were more interpersonally oriented and needed to talk it over with someone, etc., etc. The notion that our society is “team” oriented is flawed. Most of our organizations are authoritarian, including the law, education, business, and the military. There is someone at the top who makes decisions–a judge, a teacher, a CEO, a general–and those below must follow. Only about 20% of us, on average, actually participate in one of the few “democratic” group activities: Juries.
My group projects were mainly during class time, during which I broke the large group into smaller ones, conducted an activity, and had a return to the larger group for reporting results.
Brian Murphy is right about our fostering individual success as the prime focus of our educational evaluation, yet working in groups is important. Learning to subjugate the self for a larger goal involving others is an important awareness, and those who cannot do this become outlaws…or CEOs or professors (being facetious here).
Assistant Professor at Saint James School of Medicine
I have observed marked improvement in group projects after providing the students with a workshop session on the Tuckman Stages of Team Development. Once they understand the causes of the Storming phase, they readily adopt the leadership strategies for moving into the Norming and Performing phases.
Former Professor at Georgia College & State University
Tuckman has fun ideas because he rhymes, but the “stage” idea can be misleading since groups don’t always necessarily progress in these phases or the phases overlap. Having taught small group communication at my college, I can say that Tuckman’s (and Jensen) ideas came out of his research in the 60’s and 70’s and have been criticized for “overreaching” when trying to formulate neat stages, but his work has been very influential. Still, consideration of the purpose of the group, its “chemistry,” and the outside pressures guiding it is important. A family discussion at Thanksgiving is very different from small groups of students asked to analyze a short story, or a Senate committee charged with examining a marriage rights bill. Whether they neatly go from Forming to Storming to Norming to Performing is questionable (Tuckman later added “Adjourning” as a fifth stage).
And Ron, I thought I had pointed to Wall Street bankers when I mentioned outlaws.
Biology Professor at Pellissippi State Community College
To David Muschell,
You are incorrect about military decision making. While generals (and colonels and majors) do have to make snap decisions in the midst of combat, the planning for combat operations is a lot more group based than most civilians think. The book “Into the Storm’ by General Fred Franks (co-written by Tom Clancy) describes the degree of collaboration between higher and lower levels of command and between adjacent units. The military understands that the best ideas don’t always come from the top. The lower ranking leader is often closer to the action and able to provide a different perspective.
Former Professor at Georgia College & State University
You have to have extreme admiration for Frederick Franks, but saying that the military structure is not authoritarian may overlook the fact that most of the best authoritarian leaders take input from others, especially those closest to the decision making theater, before making a decision. If a judge doesn’t look at precdents, a teacher at educational psychology, or a cop at the law, we can get bad decisions. The worst authoritarian leaders ignore those below them and dictate.
Professor of Curriculum, Educational Management and Research at UNEFM
I applaud Mary for raising this reflection in the group because it is a reality that we are in our teaching performance and hardly we have strategies, but Rana, Brian and Grace made some interesting proposals that we can apply.
Professor and Founder International Professors Project
Top Contributor
@David …I apologize for missing Wall Street going David.
There many other instances of overvaluing a theory, a law or an idea, since almost no reader or student, or even a professor will check the research design and statistics and logical analysis of all such.
Mallow’s “theory” of personalty was disproved fifty years ago(?), but as the following years rolled by, HR professionals and many other admins were attached to the theory at the hip. It was a nice contribution to use as a subjective guideline for further work, but not to assume the hierarchy postulated almost always works–and even almost perefect does not a theory make–its considered to have been disproven.
Many people have a miserable childhood: physically and/or emotionally, and go hungry but pretty well climb the ladder toward self actualization.
Professor and Founder International Professors Project
Top Contributor
@David …I apologize for missing Wall Street going David.
There many other instances of overvaluing a theory, a law or an idea, since almost no reader or student, or even a professor will check the research design and statistics and logical analysis of all such. Masow’s “theory” of personalty was disproved fifty years ago(?), but as the following years rolled by, HR professionals and many other admins were attached to the theory at the hip. It was a nice contribution to use as a subjective guideline for further work, but not to assume the hierarchy postulated almost always works–and even almost perefect does not a theory make–its considered to have been disproven.
Many people have a miserable childhood: physically and/or emotionally, and go hungry but pretty well climb the ladder toward self actualization.
Biology Professor at Pellissippi State Community College
Yes the military is authoritarian, but Soldiers also have to work in groups. All of my military training courses were taught in the small group style. My work as a staff officer was all done within small groups. And in Gen. Franks book he explains a lot about the reflective nature of his decision making process. How he would have his staff develop multiple possible plans and then not choose one until he had a chance to reflect on it. As he stated (paraphrasing a bit from memory): he often waited until the situation developed a bit and then the best option presented itself.
I think that it is important that students learn that group work of some time is required in all professions. Whether the group gets to make the decision or only pitch a particular plan, they stil have to work together to finish whichever job they are given.
Professor (Adjunct) at Manchester Community College
Not sure how the discussion digressed to military groups – or quoting Tommy Franks as a reliable source – but institutions such as the Army and Marine Corp do operate as small groups. The “basic” in basic training emphasizes the breaking down of individuality and being rebuilt to “all you can be” as part of a “group project.”
No place for that in accounting class.
The use of “small group” or team project instruction permeates throughout the public sector – whether military or civilian. But your added value to any group or organization remains what you contribute as an individual; first you must learn as an individual before you can effectively contribute to a group.
Group dynamics are important, but should not affect the individual outcome if not part of the learning objectives in the curriculum. I spent little time as a staff officer in the Army and never did figure out what the group think was leading to “decisions” that were handed down – and thanks to line officers like James Blunt who think as individuals, and disobeyed orders from General Wesley Clark, that we succeed as nations.
Professor of Psychology at Franklin Pierce University
I use team work in classes where, as Alan mentioned above, a particular goal is enhanced. However, I never make the project worth more than 20% of the final grade because I once saw a stellar student miss out on admittance to his preferred grad school (he was admitted to another) due to one B on his transcript (from a course where the team grade was 60%).
I also believe that equating classroom team work with the world of employment is a terrible mistake. They are just not apples to apples! The people I work with have a lot more in common with me than students in a class room have with each other; and this class room heterogeneity is at it’s worst in the freshman and sophomore years. As for the team I work with, we have identical advanced degrees in the same field. All of us competed during hiring with other applicants, yet we, not those others, got hired. The chances that our personalities would mesh well are not guaranteed, but the odds are a lot higher than randomly throwing together a group of students.
Also regarding actual employment, there are many jobs that do not require team work, and shy people or those with Asperger’s, for example, tend to self-select and gravitate to these positions. One example is a family member who works at the American College of Surgeons in Chicago. He sits in an office all by himself editing manuscripts and may see his boss once a week. Though this is not my idea of a fun time, he loves his job.
Assistant Professor Process Technology at College of the Mainland
Question: if you go into a workplace right out of College , what are you?
answer: A freshman in the workplace. A lot of book learning maybe, but damn little practical experience.
Teamwork is a requirement for the majority of folks outside Academia. You don’t have to like the other, you sure as heck don’t have to have the same outside interests.
But you do have to work together. The Team will have type A’s and type B’s and folks who play well with others and folks that don’t. There for sure are no guaranties, but i know of none except death and taxes anyways. There is a valid reason for teaching teamwork. It has a function in life and in the workplace.
and i see the “Asperger’s clause too. Which just in last few months has been called into question, if it even exists. If 5 % are that way, we modify everything and NOT teach or lead the other 95%? I modify my entire class for the same percentages? (and i know you can argue whatever that % should be and miss the point)
We do student NO service by NOT getting them out of their comfort zone in this regards.
Assistant Professor at Univ of Manitoba, Inner City Social Work Program
Top Contributor
I use group work for several classes and find that my students are apprehensive about this style UNTIL I explain that although it is “group” work they will ONLY be graded on their portion. For example, when I have the 4 groups go out to do a community assessment on the 4 sections: demographics, community characteristics, community services, and strengths and challenges, I have each student take a portion of their section and present their 4-5 page paper, as a poster presentation, in which they are quizzed about their poster and the information they gathered on the community for their particular section. Each student in each group has their section to present and defend, while at the same time they must all work together to ensure that their section is accurate! And I make sure to reinforce this grading system every class until the poster presentation, which is usually the last class before the final exam. I find that when this is explained properly, at the beginning of the class, and reinforced when the assignment is discussed, then there are fewer questions/problems. Students need to learn the importance and value of teamwork.
I have personally always hated group work – whether as a student or as an employee. Quite frankly, working with others lowers the quality of the work I could do on my own. Either that, or I end up doing all the work myself, anyway, because I have lazy group members. However, I also accept that I have to do it, so when required, I do it, and “we” produce a mediocre outcome. When I’m allowed to work alone, I get excited about the possibilities, get creative, excel, the product is better, and it’s delivered faster.
I don’t blame students for hating group work. When they say they hate group work (when I DO assign it, and I DO), I tell them that hating something is no reason not to learn to do it and no reason not to do it and do it well. “For example,” I tell them, “I also really hate doing the dishes.”
Assistant Professor at Saint James School of Medicine
It can be very difficult when individual group members simply do not have any competencies relevant to the group assignment. However, working in teams in which individual members contribute their highest level of expertise or talent to the project generates outcomes that are greater than those that could be produced by a single person working alone.
Assistant Professor Process Technology at College of the Mainland
and BINGO !!!!!!!!!!!!! Rana Thank you very much. That is EXACTLY why we should do teams in college.
BTW………….rarely in 30 + years in 5 different sets of Plant experiences have i ever been asked if i wanted to join a group. I was assigned.
I was not the lead in the group more then i was. When i was leader, i was “graded” on how the team did. The sum of the parts is most often better then just 1 part. This ” I excel when i am working alone” besides being egocentric is most often NOT true in more Industries and careers then it is.
Steve Jobs , Bill Gates, et al might be really impressive individuals no doubt, but Apple, Goggle, Microsoft, and every top 500 company is team work oriented.
Here’s what I would see…the high achievers didn’t like group work because they ended up carrying the lesser achievers. The lesser achievers didn’t like group work because they were unveiled as lesser achievers.
Assistant Professor Process Technology at College of the Mainland
maybe, but that is the real world isn’t it? Sometimes i was the high achiever , some times not so much……….It isn’t us vs them………..it’s how do you work in teams to get the “job” or “assignment” done? and maybe more importantly how do i feel about the job i am doing?
and with peer grading input, every one in class knows who is who just like in real world.
I was turned down for a promotion once early on in my career field. The Boss 2 levels up said he couldn’t afford to lose me cause i was such a great member of the team……….
Boy did i hem and haw and get bent………..then my direct boss came to me and asked me if i trusted him and his boss or not?
i had to say yes since that was the truth………i got more of a raise and moved into a more visible spot on other teams then the fella who got promoted.
Assistant Professor at Univ of Manitoba, Inner City Social Work Program
Top Contributor
I agree with Rana and Wethington! I know that my wife has standards and she told me of one bad experience where she had to expel a member of her group and then explain to the prof why. After receiving a 1 page group assignment, which was due the following week, one group member choose not to submit anything until 10pm the night before the assignment was due for the 8am class. This was after repeated phone calls and emails asking for her input! So the next morning, this group member was told that her name would be removed from the next assignment, with a handwritten explanation that she had not contributed to the assignment and the prof was also given copies of the unanswered emails for the week! The funny thing, the assignment was on Humanities and covered free will. My wife told the prof that the other group members and she were using their collective “free will” and asking this student to be removed from the group. It was done, as the prof used his free will and placed her in another group — where she caused them havoc for the rest of the semester! The problem with group work stems from conflicting personalities rather than one person maybe not wanting to do “real” work to get the job done.
But she knows that she can be hard on group members and tells them in the beginning. If you tell students that this is about teamwork and the ability to show respect for others talent, time, skill, etc, and communicate your feelings in a non-confrontational way, then group work can be amazing.
Currently my wife is helping to mentor my 4 groups writing their portion of their class community assessment, so she is helping to reign 24 different personalities and working/writing styles so that these students individual papers can be edited into one cohesive paper. Yes, group is challenging for some, as trying to overcome the need to control everything can be exhausting.
Assistant Professor at Univ of Manitoba, Inner City Social Work Program
Top Contributor
Michael – maybe the “lesser achiever” did not appreciate the demeaning tone used by those who thought they were the “higher achievers.” I know that once group members start to label others, then that shows a lack of respect. While there are (many) times that group members may not contribute what they need to the group as a whole, it is up to the instructor to be made aware of this “problem” and let the students know that there is a solution to the situation of one or several members of a group not pulling their weight and doing their job to get the project done. That is why I grade on individual work within the group assignment- that way, the students still need to work together in order to ensure that the group project is well covered/presented and at the same time one member is not carrying the academic work load for the entire group. Group work is team work!
Associate Professor and Program Director at Paralegal Program, Kapi`olani Community College
Having the group spirit falter because one member doesn’t show up consistently can negatively impact the final project. However, in the real world for which I am preparing my students, they will run into good teammates and bad teammates, and they will need to produce the best work they can, despite any slackers. This is my strategy.
I give only one group project as semester (and not in each course) in recognition of the difficulty that students have in collaborating with each other in a non-residential community college setting where 75% of the students work. I assign a maximum of three people per team and I give them a description of the three roles that are important on this team – the coordinator, the scribe, and the document preparer – and each team gets to decide who gets which role. This gives them a structure right from the start and helps manage expectations.
In addition to the rubric for the project, I also provide them, right from the start, with a team member rubric that allows them to rate their team members as participating at a 100%, 80%, 60%, 40%, 20% or 0 level. I tell the students that if one of their members is slacking, that they will have to pitch in and do the work so that they produce a quality product, but that their teamwork multiplier will be applied to their colleague (so that if the team product receives 25 points, the two dedicated members get 100% of that, or the full 25 points, while a somewhat less productive member could get an 80% rating and thus earn only 20 points, or a real slacker get 40%, or 10 points). I reserve the right to make the final judgment in case of conflict.
So each student knows that they cannot coast with penalty – the individual grade they get will be adjusted according to their peers’ perception of them. So far, I have not had many team member downgrades, and no challenges to a group’s decision to downgrade the contributions of one of its members.
I agree that it helps to reinforce that they will be evaluated privately to me from their group members. I guess there will never be a perfect situation in teamwork; but when it works the members of the team can learn from it. The real world workplace will have obstacles along the way and the more practice the better.
I have had students say well if I was working in the workplace with this team I would quit. I try to explain to students that is not always an option. Working with team members is here to stay.
Professor (Adjunct) at Manchester Community College
In my function as an employment counselor, I would never consider recommending a customer take a position or place a client in a job where they are not comfortable. There is a job out there for everyone, that they will enjoy as part of their own fulfillment. If someone is uncomfortable with group work, we would not attempt to place someone in such a position, that could very well be paramount to failure.
Working with team members, as an overpowering concept, is overrated. That goes to the current warm fuzzy that people are happier if they socialize with the people they work with. Another not so bright idea – effectively, it breaks the workplace into age groups. Let’s face it – the years I worked as a ski instructor, my “peers” (and I do hate that term) were almost young enough to be my grandchildren. Not only did we not socialize outside of work, but a lot of folks probably would ave thought it was creepy for me to be hanging around with teenage boys and girls!
While at work, we may have to suffer participating with others for a project, there are usually some major differences than in the classroom. Most likely, the team has been chosen because of the unique skills they bring to the project. Their will be a designated arbitrator or team leader, and it is not just a random group of people who may or may not ave similar goals. Although we mean well in academia, are we really satisfying the need for any particular skills or are we blindly following our own “intuition.”
Having been to faculty and staff meetings that may take weeks just to come up with a mission statement, one must question whether or not we are helping or hurting students by having them participate in our personal version of group dynamics. I don’t teach HVAC – I leave that to the experts. Same with group dynamics – let’s have the black belts (re: General Electric) take the lead. Better yet – maybe we should send faculty to Six Sigma Certification. http://www.ge.com/sixsigma/SixSigma.pdf
The root cause for all maladies in executing any large sized projects in any Country lies in this very basic ‘hatred’ to get associated with group tasks or assignments by the students. It may sound strange, but it is true through empirical proof. The very fact that Chinese are very successful in their ventures, be it the Olympics or in delivering mega projects, with a spectacular finish are all linked into their cultural inheritance to consider themselves as a part and parcel of a large family at all times and in all places. The elements of Guanxi (establishing personal rapport with one another), the Mianzhi phenomenon (influence of Face), and their indomitable ethnographic bonding (‘minzhu de jing mi jie he) all play predominant roles in their work environment. In contrast to Chinese, people in other parts of the world are all influenced by their ‘self centric’ attitude and the desire to excel and compete with peers as an individual rather than as a group. Where ever there is a cohesion between the team members, as in the case of sports / games, the clear results of success can be easily discerned due to synergy creation. If the culture of group work is indoctrinated into the young minds right from their preliminary schooling days, by designing mini projects involving team participation, we as teaching fraternity can really transform our society in a great way!
professor at Seneca College of Applied Arts and Technology
First, the “theory” –
In schools, colleges and universities, students are mainly graded on their individual competence as demonstrated in examinations of one sort or another. Assessment of personal performance and individual accountability for achievement are – like it or not – endemic to the liberal tradition (broadly defined) that has been increasingly part of Western culture since the early political theories of possessive individualism articulated by Hobbes and Locke. They are also essential to Western concepts of fairness, to what’s left of the idea of a “meritocracy,” and to concepts of unfairness such as collective punishment for the bad acts of a few (never mind coercion in the interest of creating “snitches” – as in “you’ll all get a detention until you ‘rat out’ the kid who hit the teacher in the back of the head with a piece of chalk … or a snowball”).
Group work (along with group-think and group-speak) may well be the order of the day (or the day after tomorrow) in the organizational-cum-corporate society (never mind that all members of the group are ready and willing to stab their colleagues in the back at an opportune moment and to win some sort of reward/promotion for doing so); however, we must at least acknowledge that an undiminished sense of personal responsibility and a complete dedication to teamwork are fundamentally contradictory – the potential problems this poses for employees’ mental health are enormous, if only in terms of issues of cognitive dissonance.
Now, the practice –
We all know (or should know) that assigned group work is mainly a farce. For example, tasks are almost never equally shared. The “smart kids” do the work and the dullards ride the coat-tails … especially if the smart kids are also easily intimidated and the dullards carry weapons. In any case, when all members of the group receive the same grade for an allegedly collaborative accomplishment, the ones who were mainly responsible for whatever success was achieved will inevitably feel resentment and the laggards will feel empowered for having “gamed the system.” Neither is a commendable result.
But, please, don’t get me wrong. I am a tremendous supporter of working in groups … provided that the groups are self-selected. Throughout undergraduate school and at least for my first postgraduate degree, I benefited a great deal from working with colleagues-friends in informal arrangements running from organized “study groups” in preparation for examinations to extended and unstructured “seminars” that could go for hours after a class (with or without libations at a local pub). In fact, I regard these often seemingly endless chats about this or that to have been essential to whatever learning took place for me and, I think, for others as well.
The point?
The trick is to distinguish between authentic “education” and “job training” in the sense of practice for corporate success by mirroring the “labour process” of employment and the “learning process” of education. As with most insinuations of the “business model” into the “academic atmosphere,” the results can be at best ambiguous, often oxymoronic and mostly a sham.
Incidentally, at a near-by university, several students were expelled for “plagiarism” in that they had gathered in a study group (online, I think) “brainstormed” about what was likely to be on the final exam, assigned responsibility for members to come up with answers to one or more questions, shared the information and – when the exam was written – got “caught” for providing almost identical word-for-word responses. So, it seems that not only the students but also the professors and the authorities above them are totally confused about what all of this means and may portend for a very uncertain future.
Self-selected groups are definitely the way to go. I have had very interesting issues, though, where after a time, no one would select a certain person for their group. That person had to wander around the room asking groups to please accept him in the group. Thank you for this wonderful post and the reminder that education is not all “job training.”
I do like team work. It is inspiring, fun, and let you communicate with others and build life-time friendships. Sometimes, group work hold you back, but it pays off when you meet people might need your help. This might release and ignite your mental reasoning, which will make you smarter.
The fact that one uses self – selected teams might work if all were of the exactly same motivation i suppose. I have seen “hi-performance” teams before, doesn’t usually work except maybe in a research environment.
We here select the teams. Why? Because of demographics, mixing the students up. They come to us not from the same demographic , except maybe for ivy-leaquers. We mix races, sexes, ages, family backgrounds, and the students demonstrated or even perceived abilities.
We give them projects including hands-on, oral, written, and presentations on subjects they know little if anything about. We set a timeline and send them off. As a Prof i nudge, cajole, push a little, send in right directions for info, and educate….
Take more time then a lecture? damn sure it does……But the outcome, oh the outcome when a team gets accomplishment that the project works!!!!
I have even seen teams who were successful, turn around and help other student teams reach the finish line. WITHOUT ME ASKING THEM TOO!!!
And they all Cheered and laughed and bonded thru it all……..Their eyes lite up, they hug each other, a sense of accomplishment is born showing how teamwork……..WORKS!!!!!
Anybody ever seen a high school or college debate team win??? WOW……..
I am not as eloquent as Howard. But i teach in a real world . :
“The trick is to distinguish between authentic “education” and “job training” in the sense of practice for corporate success by mirroring the “labour process” of employment and the “learning process” of education. As with most insinuations of the “business model” into the “academic atmosphere,” the results can be at best ambiguous, often oxymoronic and mostly a sham.”
Teams aren’t back stabbing, cut your throat minded or bad things. Neither is business. To even imply such when discussing what i believe we are to do as educators and mentors is ludicrous. You want to develop that side ?
I certainly don’t. It’s always amazing to me what stops Academia from investing in what supposedly is our concerns, the students.
Like it or not students need to go to jobs after college. Most of those jobs will NOT be academic in nature.
I rarely got to “pick” my teams i worked on. In Academia i sure haven’t. In workforce , omg i mean jobs…….GASP….in the “real “world, the same was true.
Doctors work together in surgery with all sorts of specialized training to ensure the outcome, a healed patient. Businesses can’t run without teamwork. The Military , far from what has been said here, may have top down leadership, but you can not fix a jet or ship or tank all by one person.
We tell the students “you can either be an agent for change in your life……or get run over by it”
Founder, Clavester University College Ltd; Clicking Connections; Oh Gracie! Sorrel jelly, wine and short stories
Re grade and plagiarism:
All group members have a collective responsibility where a group task is concerned. One cannot say not me, but the others. The grade is to be the same in my book.
My students are definitely fans of forming their own groups. What I did this semester was let them pick a topic, and also tell me if there were people in class they wanted to work with. For people who had other people they specifically wanted to work with, I tried to accommodate them. For people who did not know the other students well enough to know whom they wanted to work with, I assigned them to groups by the topic they were interested in.
I have a question for those of you who let students form their own groups, though. How do you handle that in a class of, say, 20-30, when the students don’t really know one another yet?
associate professor, faculty of art at Ontario College of Art & Design
At OCAD University in Toronto, i give my students a group assignment as their first assignment. I allow them to form their own groups and intervene when they are uncertain.
The students produce a short performative drawing using old-school overhead projectors and drawings on acetate, creating a narrative or music to accompany the images. I video their performances and later together we review the projects and offer critique based on the predetermined criteria. The project is only worth 20% of their total grade for the course in order to factor in the coasters. The results vary from year to year.
The project is not so much about product, although of course it is an important factor, but rather about learning to work in a group – how to organize themselves and utilize each others strengths to best advantage. Even in the arts, we are dependent on each other to form our ideas and forward them through the creation of exhibition venues for example. Often, after this project, students find peers and friendships emerge which sometimes continue long after they have graduated. In a large university setting is often hard for students to connect with one another, and let’s face it, so much learning comes from informal discussions among peers as from formal lecturing at the front of the lecture hall. And in the professional world, the discussion goes on after a degree is achieved.
Eureka: machine learning tool, brainstorming engine. give it an initial idea and it returns similar ideas. Like Google: refine the idea, so the machine can understand it better. create a collection of ideas to translate into course design or others.
Netlix:
influencers and microinfluencers, pre- and doing the execution
a machine can construct a book with the help of a person. bionic book. machine and person working hand in hand. provide keywords and phrases from lecture notes, presentation materials. from there recommendations and suggestions based on own experience; then identify included and excluded content. then instructor can construct.
Design may be the least interesting part of the book for the faculty.
multiple choice quiz may be the least interesting part, and faculty might want to do much deeper assessment.
use these machine learning techniques to build assessment. how to more effectively. inquizitive is the machine learning
students engagements and similar prompts
presence in the classroom: pre-service teachers class. how to immerse them and practice classroom management skills
First class: marriage btw VR and use of AI – an environment headset: an algorithm reacts how teachers are interacting with the virtual kids. series of variables, oppty to interact with present behavior. classroom management skills. simulations and environments otherwise impossible to create. apps for these type of interactions
facilitation, reflection and research
AI for more human experience, allow more time for the faculty to be more human, more free time to contemplate.
Jason: Won’t the use of AI still reduce the amount of faculty needed?
Christina Dumeng: @Jason–I think it will most likely increase the amount of students per instructor.
Andrew Cole (UW-Whitewater): I wonder if instead of reducing faculty, these types of platforms (e.g., analytic capabilities) might require instructors to also become experts in the various technology platforms.
Dirk Morrison: Also wonder what the implications of AI for informal, self-directed learning?
Kate Borowske: The context that you’re presenting this in, as “your own jazz band,” is brilliant. These tools presented as a “partner” in the “band” seems as though it might be less threatening to faculty. Sort of gamifies parts of course design…?
Dirk Morrison: Move from teacher-centric to student-centric? Recommender systems, AI-based tutoring?
Andrew Cole (UW-Whitewater): The course with the bot TA must have been 100-level right? It would be interesting to see if those results replicate in 300, 400 level courses
Our first Library 2.022 mini-conference: “Virtual Reality and Learning: Leading the Way,” will be held online (and for free) on Tuesday, March 29th, 2022.
Virtual Reality was identified by the American Library Association as one of the 10 top library technology trends for the future. The use of this technology is equally trending in the education, museum, and professional learning spheres. Virtual Reality is a social and digital technology that uniquely promises to transform learning, build empathy, and make personal and professional training more effective and economical.
Through the leadership of the state libraries in California, Nevada, and Washington, Virtual Reality projects have been deployed in over 120 libraries in the three states in both economically and geographically diverse service areas. This example, as well as other effective approaches, can help us to begin a national conversation about the use of XR/immersive learning technology in libraries, schools, and museums; and about making content available to all users, creating spaces where digital inclusion and digital literacy serves those who need it the most
This is a free event, being held live online and also recorded. REGISTER HERE
to attend live and/or to receive the recording links afterward.
Please also join this Library 2.0 network to be kept updated on this and future events.
Everyone is invited to participate in our Library 2.0 conference events, which are designed to foster collaboration and knowledge sharing among information professionals worldwide. Each three-hour event consists of a keynote panel, 10-15 crowd-sourced thirty-minute presentations, and a closing keynote.
CALL FOR PROPOSALS:The call for proposals is now open. We encourage proposals that showcase effective uses of Virtual Reality in libraries, schools, and museums. We encourage proposals that also address visions or examples of Virtual Reality impacting adult education, STEM learning, the acquisition of marketable skills, workforce development, and unique learning environments.. Proposals can be submitted HERE.
KEYNOTE SPEAKERS, SPECIAL GUESTS, AND ORGANIZERS:
Sara Jones
State Librarian, Washington State Library
Sara Jones previously served as the director of the Marin County Free Library since July 2013. Prior to her time in California, Jones held positions in Nevada libraries for 25 years, including serving as the Carson City Library Director, the Elko-LanderEureka County Library System Director and Youth Services Coordinator, and Nevada State Librarian and Administrator of the State Library and Archives from 2000-2007. Jones was named the Nevada Library Association’s Librarian of the Year in 2012; served as Nevada’s American Library Association (ALA) Council Delegate for four years; coordinated ALA National Library Legislative Day for Nevada for 12 years; served as the Nevada Library Association president; was an active member of the Western Council of State Libraries serving as both vice president and president; and served on the University of North Texas Department of Library and Information Sciences Board of Advisors for over 10 years. She was awarded the ALA Sullivan award for services to children in 2018. She is a member and past-president of CALIFA, a nonprofit library membership consortium.
Tammy Westergard
Senior Workforce Development Leader, Project Coordinator – U.S. Department of Education Reimagine Workforce Preparation Grant Program – Supporting and Advancing Nevada’s Dislocated Individuals – Project SANDI
As Nevada State Librarian (2020 – 2021), Tammy Douglass Westergard was a leader in envisioning the dynamic roles of libraries in the future of learning and democracy in America. Tammy was also named the Nevada Library Association’s 2020 Librarian of the Year. She deployed the first certification program within any public library in America where individuals can earn a Manufacturing Technician 1 (MT1), a nationally recognized industry credential necessary to get many of the high paying careers in advanced manufacturing. In parallel with California public libraries, Westergard launched in Nevada the first State-wide learning program in American public libraries delivering augmented reality and virtual reality STEM content and equipment, resulting in immersive learning experiences for thousands of learners. Westergard imagined and then became the project design leader for the first-ever initiative deploying 3D learning tools for the College of Southern Nevada’s (CSN) allied health programs. As a result, CSN is the first dialysis technician training program in the world to use a virtual reality simulation for instruction and CSN was able to accept remote, online learners into its program for students who were previously unable to access the program.Tammy received her bachelor’s degree from the University of Nevada, Reno, a Master of Library Science from the University of North Texas and is a member of Beta Phi Mu, the international library and information studies honor society. She is a member of the International Advisory Board of the Vaclav Havel Library Foundation. The Library Journal named Westergard an “Agent of Change Mover and Shaker.” Tammy’s great passion is advancing educational opportunities through the library. She believes there is dignity in work, which is why she is expanding first-in-the-country programs she created that help displaced workers reskill and upskill so they can step into living wage jobs.
Greg Lucas
California State Librarian
Greg Lucas was appointed California’s 25th State Librarian by Governor Jerry Brown on March 25, 2014. Prior to his appointment, Greg was the Capitol Bureau Chief for the San Francisco Chronicle where he covered politics and policy at the State Capitol for nearly 20 years. During Greg’s tenure as State Librarian, the State Library’s priorities have been to improve reading skills throughout the state, put library cards into the hands of every school kid and provide all Californians the information they need – no matter what community they live in. The State Library invests $10 million annually in local libraries to help them develop more innovative and efficient ways to serve their communities. Since 2015, the State Library has improved access for millions of Californians by helping connect more than half of the state’s 1,100 libraries to a high-speed Internet network that links universities, colleges, schools, and libraries around the world. Greg holds a Master’s in Library and Information Science from California State University San Jose, a Master’s in Professional Writing from the University of Southern California, and a degree in communications from Stanford University.
Milton Chen
Independent Speaker, Author, Board Member
Milton says that he has had a very fortunate and fulfilling career on both coasts, working with passionate innovators to transform education in creative ways. His first job out of college was at Sesame Workshop in New York, working with founder Joan Cooney and some amazingly talented colleagues in TV production and educational research. From 1976 to 1980, he worked in the research department, creating science curricula for Sesame Street and testing segments for The Electric Company, the reading series. He then served as director of research for the development of 3-2-1 Contact, a science series for 8- to 12-year-olds. Eventually, Sesame Street circled the globe, with broadcasts in more than 100 countries and versions in Spanish, Chinese, Arabic, and many other languages. He then came to the Bay Area to pursue doctoral studies in communication at Stanford. His dissertation looked at gender differences in high school computer use, including new desktop computers we called “microcomputers.” After two years as an assistant professor at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, he joined KQED-San Francisco (PBS) in 1987 as director of education. They worked with teachers to incorporate video into their lessons, using VCRs! He wrote my first book, The Smart Parent’s Guide to Kids’ TV (1994) and hosted a program on the topic with special guest, First Lady Hillary Clinton. In 1998, he joined The George Lucas Educational Foundation as executive director. During his 12 years there, thjey produced documentaries and other media on schools embracing innovations such as project-based learning, social/emotional learning, digital technologies, and community engagement. They created the Edutopia brand to represent more ideal environments for learning. Today, the Edutopia.org website attracts more than 5 million monthly users.
Karsten Heise
Director of Strategic Programs, Nevada Governor’s Office of Economic Development (GOED) i
Karsten Heise joined the Nevada Governor’s Office of Economic Development (GOED) in April 2012 initially as Technology Commercialization Director and then continued as Director of Strategic Programs. He leads Innovation Based Economic Development (IBED) in Nevada. As part of IBED, he created and manages Nevada’s State Small Business Credit Initiative (SSBCI) Venture Capital Program. He also leads and overseas the ‘Nevada Knowledge Fund’ to spur commercialization at the state’s research institutions and to foster Research & Development engagements with the private sector as well as supporting local entrepreneurial ecosystems and individual startups. In addition, Karsten is deeply familiar with the European vocational training system having completed his banking-apprenticeship in Germany. This experience inspired the development of the ‘Learn and Earn Advanced career Pathway’ (LEAP) framework in Nevada, which progressed to becoming the standard template for developing career pathway models in the state. He is deeply passionate about continuously developing new workforce development approaches dealing with the consequences of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Prior to joining the GOED, Karsten spent five years in China working as an external consultant to Baron Group Beijing and as member of the senior management team at Asia Assets Limited, Beijing. Before relocating to Beijing, Karsten worked for 10 years in the international equity divisions of London-based leading Wall Street investment banks Morgan Stanley, Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette (DLJ), and most recently Credit Suisse First Boston (CSFB). As Vice President at CSFB, he specialized in alternative investments, structured products, and international equities. His clients were entrepreneurs, ultra-high net worth individuals and family offices as well as insurance companies, pension funds, asset managers and banks. Karsten speaks German and Mandarin Chinese. Karsten completed his university education in the United Kingdom with a Bachelor of Science with First Class Honours in Economics from the University of Buckingham, a Master of Science with Distinction in International Business & Finance from the University of Reading, and a Master of Philosophy with Merit in Modern Chinese Studies, Chinese Economy from the University of Cambridge – Wolfson College. He is also an alumnus of the Investment Management Evening Program at London Business School and completed graduate research studies at Peking University, China.
Dana Ryan, PhD
Special Assistant to the President, Truckee Meadows Community College
With a doctorate in educational leadership from the University of Nevada, Reno, Dana has decades advancing education and training solutions to meaningfully link, scale, enhance and further develop digital components in healthcare, advanced manufacturing, logistics, IT and construction trades. She understands the WIOA one-stop-operating-system programs and processes and can communicate how delivery of services to clients through local offices, regional centers and libraries is achieved. Skill with analysis of a variety of labor market and other demographic information creates excellence in explaining the relevance of labor market data and local, state, and national labor market trends. Dana interfaces with labor and management groups/leaders, and others.
This is a free event, being held live online and also recorded. REGISTER HERE
to attend live and/or to receive the recording links afterward.
Please also join this Library 2.0 network to be kept updated on this and future events.
