Searching for "teach"

multimedia books

http://www.freetech4teachers.com/2018/03/5-tools-for-creating-multimedia-books.html

5 Tools for Creating Multimedia Books – 2018-25eo7ji

LucidPress https://www.lucidpress.com/

https://www.apple.com/ibooks-author/

https://www.writereader.com/en

Book Creator

Book Creator – Love Learning

MadMag

https://madmagz.com/

++++++++++++++

added Oct. 30, 2018

5 Ways to Make Multimedia Books

Storybird provides templates and artwork for creating digital stories.

Alphabet Organizer is a great little tool from Read Write Think

Widbook is a platform designed to help people collaboratively create multimedia books.

Book Creator

+++++++++++++
more on ebooks in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=electronic+books

more on OER in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=OER

student inquiry

Type of Student Inquiry

https://www.kqed.org/mindshift/50620/how-to-ease-students-into-independent-inquiry-projects

The excerpt below is from the book “Inquiry Mindsets: Nurturing the Dreams, Wonders, and Curiosities of Our Youngest Learners,” by Trevor MacKenzie with Rebecca Bathurst-Hunt, published by EdTechTeam Press.

student inquiry

Scaffolding is critical to our inquiry journey. Too often teachers enter the inquiry pool in the deep end, heading straight to Free Inquiry

power of provocation

++++++++++++
more on student inquiry in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=student+inquiry

 

assessment learning outcomes

The Misguided Drive to Measure ‘Learning Outcomes’

Selecting LMS

A Guide to Picking a Learning Management System: The Right Questions to Ask

By Mary Jo Madda (Columnist)     Feb 14, 2017

https://www.edsurge.com/news/2017-02-14-a-guide-to-learning-management-systems-the-right-questions-to-ask

Over the past 10 years, new learning management systems (LMSs) have sprung on the scene to rival the Blackboards and Moodles of old. On the EdSurge Product Index alone, 56 products self-identify and fall into the LMS category. And with certain established companies like Pearson pulling out of the LMS ranks, where do you start?

As University of Central Florida’s Associate Vice President of Distributed Learning, Tom Cavanagh, wrote in an article for EDUCAUSE, “every institute has a unique set of instructional and infrastructure circumstances to consider when deciding on an LMS,” but at the same time, “all institutions face certain common requirements”—whether a small charter school, a private university or a large public school district.

The LMS Checklist

#1: Is the platform straightforward and user-friendly?

#2: Who do we want to have access to this platform, and can we adjust what they can see?

#3: Can the instructor and student(s) talk to and communicate with each other easily?

“Students and faculty live a significant portion of their daily lives online in social media spaces,” writes University of Central Florida’s Tom Cavanagh in his article on the LMS selection process. “Are your students and faculty interested in these sorts of interplatform connections?”

#5: Does this platform plug in with all of the other platforms we have?

“Given the pace of change and the plethora of options with educational technology, it’s very difficult for any LMS vendor to keep up with stand-alone tools that will always outperform built-in tools,” explains Michael Truong, executive director of innovative teaching and technology at Azusa Pacific University. According to Truong, “no LMS will be able to compete directly with tools like Piazza (discussion forum), Socrative (quizzing), EdPuzzle (video annotation), etc.” 

As a result, Truong says, “The best way to ‘prepare’ for future technological changes is to go with an LMS that plays well with external tools.

#6: Is the price worth the product?

A reality check: There is no perfect LMS.

++++++++++++++++++
more on LMS in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=learning+management+systems

humor in the classroom

How bringing comics into the classroom made me love teaching again

Tim Smyth  May 08, 2017 05:10 PM EDT

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/education/column-bringing-comics-classroom-made-love-teaching

++++++++++++++++++
more on humor in the classroom in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=humor

more on comics in education in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=comics

personalized learning

Personalized Learning: What It Really Is and Why It Really Matters

 and 

https://mfeldstein.com/personalized-learning-really-really-matters/

The following is a re-post from a 2016 EDUCAUSE Review article of ours with minor updates.

(1) the circumstances under which personalized learning can help students and

(2) the best way to evaluate the real educational value for products that are marketed under the personalized learning banner.

The most descriptive label we could come up with for the practices that the two of us have observed in our school visits might be undepersonalized teaching.

The most stereotypical depersonalized teaching experience is the large lecture class, but there are many other situations in which teachers do not connect with individual students and/or meet the students’ specific needs. For example, even a small class might contain students with a wide-enough range of skills, aptitudes, and needs that the teacher cannot possibly serve them all equally well. Or a student may have needs (or aptitudes) that the teacher simply doesn’t get an opportunity to see within the amount of contact time that the class allows. The truth is that students fall through the cracks all the time, even in the best classes taught by the best teachers. Failing a course is the most visible evidence, but more often students drift through the class and earn a passing grade—maybe even a good grade—without getting any lasting educational benefit.

personalized learning as a practice rather than a product

Technology then becomes an enabler for increasing meaningful personal contact. In our observations, we have seen three main technology-enabled strategies for lowering classroom barriers to one-on-one teacher/student (and student/student) interactions:

  1. Moving content broadcast out of the classroom: Even in relatively small classes, a lot of class time can be taken up with content broadcast such as lectures and announcements. Personalized learning strategies often try to move as much broadcast out of class time as possible in order to make room for more conversation. This strategy is sometimes called “flipping” because it is commonly accomplished by having the teacher record the lectures they would normally give in class and assign the lecture videos as homework,
  2. Turning homework time into contact time: In a traditional class, much of the work that the students do is invisible to the teacher. For some aspects, such as homework problems, teachers can observe the results but are often severely limited by time constraints.Personalized learning approaches often allow the teacher to observe the students’ work in digital products, so that there is more opportunity to coach students.
  3. Providing tutoring: Sometimes students get stuck in problem areas that don’t require help from a skilled human instructor. Although software isn’t good at teaching everything, it can be good at teaching some things. Personalized learning approaches can offload the tutoring for those topics to adaptive learning software that gives students interactive feedback while also turning the students’ work into contact time by making it observable to the teacher at a glance through analytics.

 

personalized learning

In the business world, an analogous initiative might be called “business process redesign.” Emphasis is on process. The primary question being asked is, “What is the most effective way to accomplish the goal?” The redesigned process may well need software, but it is the process itself that matters. In personalized learning, the process we are redesigning is that of teaching individual students what they need to learn from a class as effectively as possible (though we can easily imagine applying the same kind of exercise to improving advising, course registration, or any other important function).

Self-Regulated Learning

Students in the course spend part of their class time in a computer lab, working at their own pace through an adaptive learning math program. Students who already know much of the content can move through it quickly, giving them more time to master the concepts that they have yet to learn. Students who have more to learn can take their time and get tutoring and reinforcement from the software. Teachers, now freed from the task of lecturing, roam the room and give individual attention to those students who need it. They can also see how students are doing, individually and as a class, through the software’s analytics. But the course has another critical component that takes place outside the computer lab, separate from the technology. Every week, the teachers meet with the students to discuss learning goals and strategies. Students review the goals they set the previous week, discuss their progress toward those goals, evaluate whether the strategies they used helped them, and develop new goals for the next week.

+++++++++++++++
more on personalized learning
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=personalized+learning

condensed semesters

Austin, A., & Gustafson, L. (2006). Impact of Course Length on Student Learning. JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION, 5(1), 26–37.
Condensed or time shortened semesters are becoming more common as more non-traditional students seek higher education. Many universities now offer full semester courses over two or three weekends. Also, inter semester courses of one to three weeks are also becoming popular as university administrators seek to find ways to increase student enrollments. While there is much anecdotal evidence that grades during summer semesters tend to be higher than during the fall semester, we must ask if condensed semester courses actually provide students with the same learning experience as a traditional 16-week semester?
Overall we find that there is a significant improvement from taking shorter courses that cannot be explained solely by student characteristics. Using a very large database and by using more robust models this study provides more definitive results than have been achieved in past studies. Compared to a sixteen week semester, there is an improvement at 8 weeks, 4 weeks, and 3 weeks. We also find that those benefits differ, peaking at four weeks. 10 This complements the results of Scott (2003) who finds that classroom relationships and classroom atmosphere are two important factors that explain why performance is better in intensive courses than the traditional format i.e. there is a better bond between teacher and student when they meet every day than just two or three times a week. While 4 week and 3 week sessions both meet daily, the three week session, with just 11 teaching days, may be to short a time span for that bond to fully develop. More importantly, we also find that the improved grades are not meaningless – they do reflect greater learning.11 We find that the grades given for a shortened intensive course have the same significantexplanatory power for future performance as those earned during a traditional 16 week semester. This combats the popular perception (among students anyway) that the bar is lowered in some manner during the shortened sessions. This is clearly not the case as we find no evidence of any correction for those grades. There are some obvious policy implications from this study. Universities wishing to maximize learning with limited resources might consider changing their course structure from predominately sixteen week to four week semesters, a more modular system. A full semester load (12 hours) can be taken in the same time (16 weeks) by taking a traditional semester, or 4 four weeks sessions. Both cases would involve the same amount of class time per week, and so the modular structure would place no additional burden on a student.
Jaschik, S. (2008, March 28). Students Prefer Intensive Courses. Retrieved February 22, 2018, from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/03/28/intensive

second IMS podcast on technology in education

Second IMS podcast on technology in education: Constructivism

Today’s vocast will be broadcasted live at:

Adobe Connect      |     Facebook Live   |       Twitter (#IMSvodcast) |

and will be archived at:

SCSU MediaSpaceYouTube   (subscribe for the channel for future conversations)

Constructivism.
Student-centered learning theory and practice are based on the constructivist learning theory that emphasizes the learner’s critical role in constructing meaning from new information and prior experience.

  • What is it?
  • Why do we have to know about it
  • Can we just disagree and stick to behaviorism?
  • Is it about student engagement?
  • Is it about the use of technology?
  • Resources
    • https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/06/28/constructivism-lecture-versus-project-based-learning/
      https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2013/12/03/translating-constructivism-into-instructional-design-potential-and-limitations/
      https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2016/03/28/student-centered-learning-literature-review/
      https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/11/05/online-discussion-with-plovdiv-university/
      https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/05/27/handbook-of-mobile-learning/
      Crompton, Muilenburg and Berge’s definition for m-learning is “learning across multiple contexts, through social and content interactions, using personal electronic devices.”
    • The “context”in this definition encompasses m-learnng that is formalself-directed, and spontaneous learning, as well as learning that is context aware and context neutral.
    • therefore, m-learning can occur inside or outside the classroom, participating in a formal lesson on a mobile device; it can be self-directed, as a person determines his or her own approach to satisfy a learning goal; or spontaneous learning, as a person can use the devices to look up something that has just prompted an interest (Crompton, 2013, p. 83). (Gaming article Tallinn)Constructivist Learnings in the 1980s – Following Piage’s (1929), Brunner’s (1996) and Jonassen’s (1999) educational philosophies, constructivists proffer that knowledge acquisition develops through interactions with the environment. (p. 85). The computer was no longer a conduit for the presentation of information: it was a tool for the active manipulation of that information” (Naismith, Lonsdale, Vavoula, & Sharples, 2004, p. 12)Constructionist Learning in the 1980s – Constructionism differed from constructivism as Papert (1980) posited an additional component to constructivism: students learned best when they were actively involved in constructing social objects. The tutee position. Teaching the computer to perform tasks.Problem-Based learning in the 1990s – In the PBL, students often worked in small groups of five or six to pool knowledge and resources to solve problems. Launched the sociocultural revolution, focusing on learning in out of school contexts and the acquisition of knowledge through social interaction
    • Socio-Constructivist Learning in the 1990s. SCL believe that social and individual processes are independent in the co-construction of knowledge (Sullivan-Palinscar, 1998; Vygotsky, 1978).
    • 96-97). Keegan (2002) believed that e-learning was distance learning, which has been converted to e-learning through the use of technologies such as the WWW. Which electronic media and tools constituted e-learning: e.g., did it matter if the learning took place through a networked technology, or was it simply learning with an electronic device?
  • Discussion
    • Share with us practical examples of applying constructivist approach in your class
    • Would one hour workshop on turning existing class assignments into constructivist-based class assignments be of interest for you?

+++++++++++++++
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/02/12/first-ims-podcast-on-technology-in-education/

1 61 62 63 64 65 117