Searching for "distance education"

distance education theories

Transactional Distance

online learning is most effective when the perceived pedagogical distance between the instructor and students in the course is minimized with increased interaction; Interaction occurs through learner-instructor communication, learner-learner collaboration, and learner-content engagement. All three levels of interaction have important implications for effective online learning

popular:

8 Tips To Minimize Transactional Distance In eLearning

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_distance

dissertations:

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cehsdiss/51

https://etd.auburn.edu/bitstream/handle/10415/5764/Dissertation_lebeck.pdf

http://faculty.jou.ufl.edu/mleslie/spring96/moore.html

Classes:

https://ci484-learning-technologies.wikispaces.com/Transactional+Distance+Theory

By M. Moore:

Moore, M. (1972). Learner autonomy: The second dimension of independent learning.Convergence, 5, 76-88.

Moore, M. (1973). Toward a theory of independent learning and teaching. Journal of Higher Education, 44, 661-679.

Moore, M. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp.22-38).New York: Routledge.

Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3 (2), 1-6.

Moore, M. G. (2007). The theory of transactional distance. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of  distance education (2nd ed.), (pp.89-105). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Moore, M. G., (2013). Handbook of distance education (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge

Community of Inquiry (CoI)

The Community of Inquiry theoretical framework focuses on the degree of presence in the online learning environment. Presence is vital to student success in online courses. There are three types of presence that must be maintained: 1. Social presence to increase learners’ sense of community in the online environment, 2. Cognitive presence to enable learners to construct meaning from the online experience, and 3. Teaching presence to increase learner perception of the instructor’s ability to provide structure and direction in the online environment

popular:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_of_inquiry

https://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Community_of_inquiry_model

https://coi.athabascau.ca/coi-model/

Community of Inquiry from Phil Ice

peer reviewed:
https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/18714/INTHIG%20369%20INTRO.pdf

https://www.academia.edu/398997/A_Constructivist_Approach_to_Online_Learning_The_Community_of_Inquiry_Framework

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED387454

By Garrison:

Garrison,  D. R., & Akyol, Z. (2013).  The community of inquiry theoretical framework. In M. Moore, Handbook of Distance Education (3 ed.) (pp. 104-119). New York: Routledge.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based

environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2/3), 87-105.

Garrison, D.R. and Arbaugh, J.B. (2007). Researching the Community of Inquiry framework:

Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education 10(3): 157–172 (2007).

Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19, 133-148.

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

Regulations for Distance Education

Breaking News on “Teacher Prep” Regulations for Distance Education

It is proposed that a college’s program could fall short in ONE state and lose the right to offer TEACH grants to distance students in ANY state. That might work if every state used the same criteria, but that’s not required. The “Discussion of Costs, Benefits, and Transfers” is a baffling attempt at measuring activity for which there is no good data.

legal issues with diplomas from online/distance education

CORNELIUS, L. M., & CAVANAUGH, T. W. (2013). Distance Learning, Distant Courtrooms. Chronicle Of Higher Education60(12), A30.

http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip&db=aph&AN=92043236

http://chronicle.com.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/article/Distance-Learning-Distant/143097/

We are in the early stages of distance-­specific litigation, and most rulings, thus far, have been made at the level of basic trial courts. We await precedents from more senior courts, the possibility of Congressional action, interstate compacts, and other unseen developments for more guidance. At the same time, however, it has also become clear that the new frontier of distance learning is also entering the sphere of courts and lawyers. It is not too early for distance programs and their institutions to take note. – See more at: http://chronicle.com.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/article/Distance-Learning-Distant/143097/#sthash.xGXwBG1D.dpuf

 

 

Intrinsically motivated to do distance learning

https://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2020/04/four_ways_to_help_students_feel_intrinsically_motivated_to_do_distance_learning.html

 

Formative Assessment in Distance Learning

https://www.edutopia.org/article/formative-assessment-distance-learning

Whether we use synchronous or asynchronous online sessions, whether we call it distance or virtual learning, we’re all challenged to provide meaningful education experiences at a distance as the education world grapples with the impact of Covid-19.

Know your purpose

Collect data over time

Focus on feedback

Check for understanding in synchronous sessions

Leverage personal conversations

Check in on SEL

Make it useful

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

Online Assessment
https://sites.psu.edu/onlineassessment/gather-evidence/

Formative Assessment

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

formative assessment in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=formative+assessment

questions about online education

https://nepc.colorado.edu/blog/does-it-work

One of the most frequently and persistently asked questions about online education is “does it work” or “is it effective.”
The question is meaningless because there cannot be any definitive answer for a number of reasons.

First, online education (and its variants such a online instruction, online teaching, distance education and distance learning) is a big umbrella that covers a wide array of different practices, which vary a great deal in terms of quality. Comparing the effectiveness of online education with face-to-face education has been the most common research approach to examine the effectiveness of online education. And the answer has been, for a long time, that there is no significant difference between the two. This answer, however, does not mean online is effective or not, it simply means there are plenty of effective and ineffective programs in both online and face-to-face education. In other words, the within variation is larger than the between variation.

Second, another reason that there cannot be a definitive answer to this question is the diversity of stakeholders in online education.
And unfortunately what works for one stakeholder may not work for the others.

Third, even within the same program and with only students as the stakeholder, there cannot be a definitive answer because no program can possibly have the same effects on all students equally.

Fourth, yet another reason that the question cannot have a definitive answer is the multiplicity of outcomes. Education outcomes include more than what has been typically measured by grades or tests.

Fifth, the rapid changes in technology that can be used to deliver online education add to the elusiveness of a definitive answer to the question. While pedagogy, design, and human actors certainly paly a significant role in the experiences of online education, so does technology.

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

Education and New Developments 2019

International Conference on Education and New Developments 2019
27 to 29 of June, 2020 – Zagreb, Croatia
http://www.end-educationconference.org/

  • In TEACHERS AND STUDENTS: Teachers and Staff training and education; Educational quality and standards; Curriculum and Pedagogy; Vocational education and Counselling; Ubiquitous and lifelong learning; Training programmes and professional guidance; Teaching and learning relationship; Student affairs (learning, experiences and diversity; Extra-curricular activities; Assessment and measurements in Education.
    • In PROJECTS AND TRENDS: Pedagogic innovations; Challenges and transformations in Education; Technology in teaching and learning; Distance Education and eLearning; Global and sustainable developments for Education; New learning and teaching models; Multicultural and (inter)cultural communications; Inclusive and Special Education; Rural and indigenous Education; Educational projects.
    • In TEACHING AND LEARNING: Critical Thinking; Educational foundations; Research and development methodologies; Early childhood and Primary Education; Secondary Education; Higher Education; Science and technology Education; Literacy, languages and Linguistics (TESL/TEFL); Health Education; Religious Education; Sports Education.
    • In ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUES: Educational policy and leadership; Human Resources development; Educational environment; Business, Administration, and Management in Education; Economics in Education; Institutional accreditations and rankings; International Education and Exchange programmes; Equity, social justice and social change; Ethics and values; Organizational learning and change; Corporate Education.

= Types of Contributions =
All submissions are subjected to a blind-review refereeing process and are divided in these categories:
– Oral Presentations
– Posters
– Workshops
– Virtual presentations
– Company Presentation
Corporates can also showcase their products or services in the conference exhibitions area by contacting the secretariat or publicity email (provided below).

= Conference Date and Location =
END 2020 will be held in Zagreb, Croatia (Hotel Dubrovnik) and will occur from 27 to 29 of June, 2020.

= Contacts =
Conference email: secretariat@end-educationconference.org
Publicity email: publicity@end-educationconference.org

 

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)

IMS vodcast technology in education

Posted by InforMedia Services on Thursday, February 22, 2018

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/

net neutrality and education

3 Ways a Net Neutrality Repeal Might Impact Universities

The impending change in internet regulations could be detrimental to the quality of education students receive.
Meghan Bogardus Cortez , Jan 11, 2018
https://edtechmagazine.com/higher/article/2018/01/3-ways-net-neutrality-repeal-might-impact-universities

1. Technology that Increases Access Hits the Slow Lane

Innovations in videoconferencing and lecture capture technologies have allowed universities to provide flexible learning experiences to students no matter their location. However, if internet service providers are allowed to create “fast lanes” and “slow lanes” of access, experts worry these learning experiences will be in jeopardy.
“slow lanes” of internet access could make it difficult for students to access cloud software or applications without hitting data caps.

2. Inhibit Ability to Research and Access Materials

a 40-page commentary to the FCC explaining how a repeal would hurt universities, eCampus News reports.

“Institutions of higher education and libraries depend upon an open internet to carry out their educational and civic missions, and to serve their communities,” reads the commentary.

“almost everything” relies on the internet in higher education. Students use it for research, to take courses and turn in assignments while faculty use it for research and to create lesson plans. Roberts says his library needs it to archive and preserve materials. Slower internet could inhibit research and access to library resources.

3. Increased Costs Without Increased Educational Experiences

high cost of attending a university might see a bump without net neutrality.
slower internet access would actually degrade the quality of education offered for a higher cost.

++++++++++++++++
more on net neutrality and education in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=net+neutrality

brain research distance ed

The Implications of Brain Research for Distance Education

Katrina A. Meyer
Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Leadership
University of North Dakota
katrina_meyer@und.nodak.edu

posted on FB in 2013 https://www.facebook.com/plamen.miltenoff/posts/10100455869591041

The brain is actually three brains: the ancient reptilian brain, the limbic brain, and the cortical brain. This article will focus on the limbic brain, because it may be most important to successfully using interactive video or web-based video. The limbic brain monitors the external world and the internal body, taking in information through the senses as well as body temperature and blood pressure, among others. It is the limbic brain that generates and interprets facial expressions and handles emotions, while the cortical brain handles symbolic activities such as language as well as action and strategizing. The two interact when an emotion is sent from the limbic to the cortical brain and generates a conscious thought; in response to a feeling of fear (limbic), you ask, “what should I do?” (cortical).

The importance of direct eye contact and deciphering body language is also important for sending and picking up clues about social context.

The loss of social cues is important because it may affect the quality of the content of the presentation (by not allowing timely feedback or questions) but also because students may feel less engaged and become frustrated with the interaction, and subsequently lower their assessment of the class and the instructor (Reeves & Nass, 1996). Fortunately, faculty can provide such social cues verbally, once they are aware of the importance of helping students use these new media.

Attachment theory also supports the importance of physical and emotional connections.

As many a struggling teacher knows, students are often impervious to learning new concepts. They may replay the new information for a test, but after time passes, they revert to the earlier (and likely wrong) information. This is referred to as the “power of mental models.” As explained in Marchese (2000), when we view a tree, it is not as if we see the tree in our head, as in photography.

The coping strategies of the two hemispheres are fundamentally different. The left hemisphere’s job is to create a belief system or model and to fold new experiences into that belief system. If confronted with some new information that doesn’t fit the model, it relies on Freudian defense mechanisms to deny, repress or confabulate – anything to preserve the status quo. The right hemisphere’s strategy is to play “Devil’s Advocate,” to question the status quo and look for global inconsistencies. When the anomalous information reaches a certain threshold, the right hemisphere decides that it is time to force a complete revision of the entire model and start from scratch (Ramachandran & Blakeslee, 1998, p. 136).

While much hemispheric-based research has been repudiated as an oversimplification (Gackenbach, 1999), the above description of how new information eventually overwhelms an old world view may be the result of multiple brain functions – some of which work to preserve our models and others to alter – that help us both maintain and change as needed.

Self-talk is the “the root of empathy, understanding, cooperation, and rules that allow us to be successful social beings. Any sense of moral behavior requires thought before action” (Ratey, 2001, p. 255).

Healy (1999) argues that based on what we know about brain development in children, new computer media may be responsible for developing brains that are largely different from the brains of adults. This is because “many brain connections have become specialized for . . . media” (p. 133); in this view, a brain formed by language and reading is different from a brain formed by hypermedia. Different media lead to different synaptic connections being laid down and reinforced, creating different brains in youngsters raised on fast-paced, visually-stimulating computer applications and video games. “Newer technologies emphasize rapid processing of visual symbols . . . and deemphasize traditional verbal learning . . . and the linear, analytic thought process . . . [making it] more difficult to deal with abstract verbal reasoning” (Healy, 1999, p. 142).

 

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

1 2 3 7