Boulder Faculty Teaching with Technology Report
Sarah Wise, Education Researcher , Megan Meyer, Research Assistant, March 8,2016
http://www.colorado.edu/assett/sites/default/files/attached-files/final-fac-survey-full-report.pdf
Faculty perceive undergraduates to be less proficient with digital literacy skills. One-third think
their students do not find or organize digital information very well. The majority (52%) think
they lack skill in validating digital information.
My note: for the SCSU librarians, digital literacy is fancy word for information literacy. Digital literacy, as used in this report is much greater area, which encompasses much broader set of skills
Faculty do not prefer to teach online (57%) or in a hybrid format (where some sessions occur
online, 32%). One-third of faculty reported no experience with these least popular course types
my note: pay attention to the questions asked; questions I am asking Mike Penrod to let me work with faculty for years. Questions, which are snubbed by CETL and a dominance of D2L and MnSCU mandated tools is established.
Table 5. Do you use these in-class technologies for teaching undergraduates? Which are the Top 3 in-class technologies you would like to learn or use more? (n = 442)
|
Top 3 |
use in most of my classes |
have used in some classes |
tried, but do not use |
N/A: no experience |
| in-class activities, problems (via worksheets, tablets, laptops, simulations, beSocratic, etc.) |
52% |
33% |
30% |
6% |
30% |
| in-class question, discussion tools (e.g. Twitter, TodaysMeet, aka “backchannel communication”) |
47% |
8% |
13% |
11% |
68% |
| using online resources to find high quality curricular materials |
37% |
48% |
31% |
3% |
18% |
| iClickers |
24% |
23% |
16% |
9% |
52% |
| other presentation tool (Prezi, Google presentation, Slide Carnival, etc.) |
23% |
14% |
21% |
15% |
51% |
| whiteboard / blackboard |
20% |
58% |
23% |
6% |
14% |
| Powerpoint or Keynote |
20% |
74% |
16% |
4% |
5% |
| document camera / overhead projector |
15% |
28% |
20% |
14% |
38%
|
Table 6. Do you have undergraduates use these assignment technology tools? Which are your Top 3 assignment technology tools to learn about or use more? (n = 432)
|
Top 3 |
use in most of my classes |
have used in some classes |
tried, but do not use |
N/A: no experience using |
| collaborative reading and discussion tools (e.g. VoiceThread, NB, NotaBene, Highlighter, beSocratic) |
43% |
3% |
10% |
10% |
77% |
| collaborative project, writing, editing tools (wikis, PBWorks, Weebly, Google Drive, Dropbox, Zotero) |
38% |
16% |
29% |
12% |
43% |
| online practice problems / quizzes with instant feedback |
36% |
22% |
22% |
8% |
47% |
| online discussions (D2L, Today’s Meet, etc) |
31% |
33% |
21% |
15% |
30% |
| individual written assignment, presentation and project tools (blogs, assignment submission, Powerpoint, Prezi, Adobe Creative Suite, etc.) |
31% |
43% |
28% |
7% |
22% |
| research tools (Chinook, pubMed, Google Scholar, Mendeley, Zotero, Evernote) |
30% |
33% |
32% |
8% |
27% |
| online practice (problems, quizzes, simulations, games, CAPA, Pearson Mastering, etc.) |
27% |
20% |
21% |
7% |
52% |
| data analysis tools (SPSS, R, Latex, Excel, NVivo, MATLAB, etc.) |
24% |
9% |
23% |
6% |
62% |
| readings (online textbooks, articles, e-books) |
21% |
68% |
23% |
1% |
8% |
Table 7. Do you use any of these online tools in your teaching? Which are the Top 3 online tools you would like to learn about or use more? (n = 437)
|
Top 3 |
use in most of my classes |
have used in some classes |
tried, but do not use |
N/A: no experience using |
| videos/animations produced for my course (online lectures, Lecture Capture, Camtasia, Vimeo) |
38% |
14% |
21% |
11% |
54% |
| chat-based office hours or meetings (D2L chat, Google Hangouts, texting, tutoring portals, etc.) |
36% |
4% |
9% |
10% |
76% |
| simulations, PhET, educational games |
27% |
7% |
17% |
6% |
70% |
| videoconferencing-based office hours or meetings (Zoom, Skype, Continuing Education’s Composition hub, etc.) |
26% |
4% |
13% |
11% |
72% |
| alternative to D2L (moodle, Google Site, wordpress course website) |
23% |
11% |
10% |
13% |
66% |
| D2L course platform |
23% |
81% |
7% |
4% |
8% |
| online tutorials and trainings (OIT tutorials, Lynda.com videos) |
21% |
4% |
16% |
13% |
68% |
| D2L as a portal to other learning tools (homework websites, videos, simulations, Nota Bene/NB, Voice Thread, etc.) |
21% |
28% |
18% |
11% |
42% |
| videos/animations produced elsewhere |
19% |
40% |
36% |
2% |
22% |
In both large and small classes, the most common responses faculty make to digital distraction are to discuss why it is a problem and to limit or ban phones in class.
my note: which completely defies the BYOD and turns into empty talk / lip service.
Quite a number of other faculty (n = 18) reported putting the onus on themselves to plan engaging and busy class sessions to preclude distraction, for example:
“If my students are more interested in their laptops than my course material, I need to make my curriculum more interesting.”
I have not found this to be a problem. When the teaching and learning are both engaged/engaging, device problems tend to disappear.”
The most common complaint related to students and technology was their lack of common technological skills, including D2L and Google, and needing to take time to teach these skills in class (n = 14). Two commented that digital skills in today’s students were lower than in their students 10 years ago.
Table 9. Which of the following are the most effective types of learning opportunities about teaching, for you? Chose your Top 2-3. (n = 473)
Count Percentage
| meeting 1:1 with an expert |
296 |
63% |
| hour-long workshop |
240 |
51% |
| contact an expert on-call (phone, email, etc) |
155 |
33% |
| faculty learning community (meeting across asemester,
e.g. ASSETT’s Hybrid/Online Course Design Seminar) |
116 |
25% |
| expert hands-on support for course redesign (e.g. OIT’s Academic Design Team) |
114 |
24% |
| opportunity to apply for grant funding with expert support, for a project I design (e.g. ASSETT’s Development Awards) |
97 |
21% |
| half-day or day-long workshop |
98 |
21% |
| other |
40 |
8% |
| multi-day retreats / institutes |
30 |
6% |
Faculty indicated that the best times for them to attend teaching professional developments across the year are before and early semester, and summer. They were split among all options for meeting across one week, but preferred afternoon sessions to mornings. Only 8% of respondents (n = 40) indicated they would not likely attend any professional development session (Table 10).
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Teaching Through Technology
Table T1: Faculty beliefs about using digital technologies in teaching
|
Count |
Column N% |
| Technology is a significant barrier to teaching and learning. |
1 |
0.2% |
| Technology can have a place in teaching, but often detracts from teaching and learning. |
76 |
18.3% |
| Technology has a place in teaching, and usually enhances the teaching learning process. |
233 |
56.0% |
| Technology greatly enhances the teaching learning process. |
106 |
25.5% |
Table T2: Faculty beliefs about the impact of technology on courses
|
Count |
Column N% |
| Makes a more effective course |
302 |
72.6% |
| Makes no difference in the effectiveness of a course |
42 |
10.1% |
| Makes a less effective course |
7 |
1.7% |
| Has an unknown impact |
65 |
15.6% |
Table T3: Faculty use of common technologies (most frequently selected categories shaded)
|
Once a month or less |
A few hours a month |
A few hours a week |
An hour a day |
Several hours a day |
| Count |
% |
Count |
% |
Count |
% |
Count |
% |
Count |
% |
| Computer |
19 |
4.8% |
15 |
3.8% |
46 |
11.5% |
37 |
9.3% |
282 |
70.7% |
| Smart Phone |
220 |
60.6% |
42 |
11.6% |
32 |
8.8% |
45 |
12.4% |
24 |
6.6% |
| Office Software |
31 |
7.8% |
19 |
4.8% |
41 |
10.3% |
82 |
20.6% |
226 |
56.6% |
| Email |
1 |
0.2% |
19 |
4.6% |
53 |
12.8% |
98 |
23.7% |
243 |
58.7% |
| Social Networking |
243 |
68.8% |
40 |
11.3% |
40 |
11.3% |
23 |
6.5% |
7 |
2.0% |
| Video/Sound Media |
105 |
27.6% |
96 |
25.2% |
95 |
24.9% |
53 |
13.9% |
32 |
8.4% |
Table T9: One sample t-test for influence of technology on approaches to grading and assessment
|
Test Value = 50 |
| t |
df |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
Mean Difference |
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference |
| Lower |
Upper |
| In class tests and quizzes |
-4.369 |
78 |
.000 |
-9.74684 |
-14.1886 |
-5.3051 |
| Online tests and quizzes |
5.624 |
69 |
.000 |
14.77143 |
9.5313 |
20.0115 |
| Ungraded assessments |
1.176 |
66 |
.244 |
2.17910 |
-1.5208 |
5.8790 |
| Formative assessment |
5.534 |
70 |
.000 |
9.56338 |
6.1169 |
13.0099 |
| Short essays, papers, lab reports, etc. |
2.876 |
70 |
.005 |
5.45070 |
1.6702 |
9.2312 |
| Extended essays and major projects or performances |
1.931 |
69 |
.058 |
3.67143 |
-.1219 |
7.4648 |
| Collaborative learning projects |
.000 |
73 |
1.000 |
.00000 |
-4.9819 |
4.9819 |
Table T10: Rate the degree to which your role as a faculty member and teacher has changed as a result of increased as a result of increased use of technology
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Somewhat Disagree |
Somewhat Agree |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| Count |
% |
Count |
% |
Count |
% |
Count |
% |
Count |
% |
Count |
% |
| shifting from the role of content expert to one of learning facilitator |
12 |
9.2% |
22 |
16.9% |
14 |
10.8% |
37 |
28.5% |
29 |
22.3% |
16 |
12.3% |
| your primary role is to provide content for students |
14 |
10.9% |
13 |
10.1% |
28 |
21.7% |
29 |
22.5% |
25 |
19.4% |
20 |
15.5% |
| your identification with your University is increased |
23 |
18.3% |
26 |
20.6% |
42 |
33.3% |
20 |
15.9% |
12 |
9.5% |
3 |
2.4% |
| you have less ownership of your course content |
26 |
20.2% |
39 |
30.2% |
24 |
18.6% |
21 |
16.3% |
14 |
10.9% |
5 |
3.9% |
| your role as a teacher is strengthened |
13 |
10.1% |
12 |
9.3% |
26 |
20.2% |
37 |
28.7% |
29 |
22.5% |
12 |
9.3% |
| your overall control over your course(s) is diminished |
23 |
17.7% |
44 |
33.8% |
30 |
23.1% |
20 |
15.4% |
7 |
5.4% |
6 |
4.6% |
Table T14: One sample t-test for influence of technology on faculty time spent on specific teaching activities
|
|
Test Value = 50 |
| t |
df |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
Mean Difference |
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference |
| Lower |
Upper |
| Lecturing |
-7.381 |
88 |
.000 |
-12.04494 |
-15.2879 |
-8.8020 |
| Preparing course materials |
9.246 |
96 |
.000 |
16.85567 |
13.2370 |
20.4744 |
| Identifying course materials |
8.111 |
85 |
.000 |
13.80233 |
10.4191 |
17.1856 |
| Grading / assessing |
5.221 |
87 |
.000 |
10.48864 |
6.4959 |
14.4813 |
| Course design |
12.962 |
94 |
.000 |
21.55789 |
18.2558 |
24.8600 |
| Increasing access to materials for all types of learners |
8.632 |
86 |
.000 |
16.12644 |
12.4126 |
19.8403 |
| Reading student discussion posts |
10.102 |
79 |
.000 |
21.98750 |
17.6553 |
26.3197 |
| Email to/with students |
15.809 |
93 |
.000 |
26.62766 |
23.2830 |
29.9724 |
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Study of Faculty and Information Technology, 2014
http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ers1407/ers1407.pdf
Although the LMS is pervasive in higher education, 15% of faculty said that they
do not use the LMS at all. Survey demographics suggest these nonusers are part of
the more mature faculty ranks, with a tenure status, more than 10 years of teaching
experience, and a full-professor standing.
18
The vast majority of faculty use the LMS
to conduct or support their teaching activities, but only three in five LMS users (60%)
said it is critical to their teaching. The ways in which faculty typically use the LMS are
presented in figure 8.
19
Pushing out information such as a syllabus or other handout
is the most common use of the LMS (58%), which is a basic functionality of the
first-generation systems that emerged in the late 1990s, and it remains one of the core
features of any LMS.
20
Many institutions preload the LMS with basic course content
(58%), up about 12% since 2011, and this base gives instructors a prepopulated plat
–
form from which to build their courses.
21
Preloading basic content does not appear to
preclude faculty from making the LMS part of their daily digital habit; a small majority
of faculty (56%) reported using the LMS daily, and another 37% use it weekly.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Digital Literacy, Engagement, and Digital Identity Development
https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/student-affairs-and-technology/digital-literacy-engagement-and-digital-identity-development
+++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++
more on digital literacy in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=digital+literacy
Save
Classroom Discussion and Students Participation: how to Secure Student Engagement to Increase Learning and Improve Teaching
- How to increase the number of students who take part in classroom discussions
- How to avoid the problem of dominant talkers
- How to encourage introverted students to increase their participation in classroom discussions
- Strategies to help your students recognize what they learned in any discussion
- How to use the first day of the semester to engage your students—and techniques for getting them to participate right from the start
- What common classroom practices can decrease the likelihood of a student participating in discussion?
- What strategies can you use to overcome established classroom practices and increase student participation?
- And how can you structure classroom discussions to better facilitate student learning?
What does Research Tell Us about Classroom Discussion? Jay Howard
http://digitalcommons.butler.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1163&context=facsch_papers
Do College Students Participate More in Discussion in Traditional Delivery Courses or in Interactive Telecourses?
https://muse.jhu.edu/journals/journal_of_higher_education/v073/73.6howard.html
facts from sociological research:
- Gender yields mixed results
- Males participate more frequently than females.
- 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
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
Jinhong, J., & Gilson, T. A. (2014). Online Threaded Discussion: Benefits, Issues, and Strategies. Kinesiology Review, 3(4), 241-246.
http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3ds3h%26AN%3d100248254%26site%3dehost-live%26scope%3dsite
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.
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
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.
PDF file available
=============
More on classroom discussions in this IMS blog:
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=discussions&submit=Search
http://podnetwork.org/event/pod-2013/
Conference program available in PDF and upub format, so I can have it on my laptop and on my mobile device: diminishes the necessity to carry and pull constantly a paper stack.
it is the only conference I know with 6AM yoga. Strong spirit in a strong body. LRS & CETL must find space and instructors an offer mediation + yoga opportunity for SCSU students to disconnect
1:00 – 5:00 PM excursion to Carnegie Mellon – Learning Spaces. LRS interest in Learning Commons.
From the pre-conference workshops, Thurs, Nov 7, 8:30AM – 12:00PM:
Linda Shadiow, Connecting Reflection and Growth: Engaging Faculty Stories.
This workshop seems attractive to me, since it coincides with my firm conviction that SCSU faculty must share “best practices” as part of the effort to engage them into learning new technologies.
Kenyon, Kimberly et al, Risky Business: Strategic Planning and Your Center.
This workshop might be attractive for Lalita and Mark Vargas, since strategic planning is considered right now at LRS and CETL might also benefit from such ideas.
roundtables, Thurs, Nov. 7, 1:30-2:45PM
Measuring the Promise in Learner-Centered Syllabi
Michael Palmer, Laura Alexander, Dorothe Bach, and Adriana Streifer, University of Virginia
Effective Faculty Practices: Student-Centered Pedagogy and Learning Outcomes
Laura Palucki Blake, UCLA
Laura is the assistant director http://gseis.ucla.edu/people/paluckiblake
3 time survey of freshmen. survey also faculty every 3 years. can link this date: faculty practices and student learning
triangulating research findings. student-centered pedagogy. which teaching practices are effective in promoting student-center learning practices.
no statistical differences in terms of student learning outcomes between part-time and full-time faculty. The literature says otherwise, but Laura did not find any statistical difference.
http://ow.ly/i/3EL77
discussions is big, small group work is big with faculty
in terms of discussions, there is huge difference between doing discussion and doing it well.
this is a self-report data, so it can be biased
there are gender differences. women more likely to use class discussions, cooperative learning same, students presentations same. gender discipline holds the gender differences. same also in STEM fields.
students evaluations of each other work. cooperative learning: it is closer gender-wise.
the more student-centered pedagogy, the less disengagement from school work.
understand on a national level what students are exposed to.
lpblake@hmc.edu
http://www.heri.ucla.edu/
wabash national data.
ePublishing: Emerging Scholarship and the Changing Role of CTLs
Laura Cruz, Andrew Adams, and Robert Crow, Western Carolina University
LORs are in Kentucky.
CETL does at least Professional Development, Resources, Eportfolios, LORSs. FLCs
Teaching Times at Penn.
model 2: around instructional technology. More and more CETL into a combined comprehensive center. about 9 are paid by IT and 11 by academic center. because of finances cuts this is the model predicted from the 90s. Why not IT? because ater they say how to use it. and how to use it effective. think outside of technology, technogogy is not the same as technology. Teacher-scholar model: research, service, teaching.
http://ow.ly/i/3EMJl
egallery and other electronic ways to recognize productivity. Stats and survey software does NOT reside with grad studies, but with CETL, so CETL can help faculty from a glimmer of an idea to presentation and publication. Research Support Specialist.
how and where it fits into faculty development. Neutrality. Should CETL be advocates for institutional, organizational change. Do CETL encourage faculty to take innovation and risk (change the culture of higher ed). Tenure and promotion: do we advocate that epub should count, e.g. a blog will count toward tenure.
a national publication: http://www.sparc.arl.org/resources/authors/addendum
we domenstrate that it is good school. scholarship of teaching will be good teaching.
OER? Open educational resources. SHould CETL host and participate in those? Do we participate in creating resources, which are designed to replace texbooks? Caroline has a state-wide grant to support faculty developing learning resources.
open access is controversial. the right to publish and republish. http://www.sparc.arl.org/
40% of all scholarly articles are owned by 3 publishers
Academic Social Media academic.edu and electronic journals.
CETL is the comprehensive center, the hub where people go to, so CETL can direct them to and or get together stakeholder to make things happen.
the lesson from this session for me is that Lalita and Keith Ewing must work much closer.
Evaluating the quality of MOOCs: Is there room for improvement?
Erping Zhu, University of Michigan; Danilo Baylen, University of West Georgia
reflection on “taking” a MOOC and the seven principles. how to design and teach MOOC using the seven principles.
MOOC has a lot of issues; this is not the focus, focus is on the instructional design. Both presenters are instructional designers. Danilo is taking MOOC in library and information science.
Second principle: what is a good graduate education.
about half had completed a course. Atter the 3rd week the motivation is dissipating.
Erping’s experience: Provost makes quick decision. The CETL was charged with MOOC at U of Michigan. Securing Digital Democracy. http://www.mooc-list.com/university-entity/university-michigan
Danilo is a librarian. his MOOC class had a blog, gets a certificate at the end. Different from online class is the badges system to get you involved in the courses. the MOOC instructors also had involved grad students to monitor the others. the production team is not usually as transparent as at Corsera. Sustainability. 10 week module, need to do reflections, feedback from peers. 7 assignments are too much for a full-time professional.
http://www.amazon.com/Library-2-0-Guide-Participatory-Service/dp/1573872970
http://tametheweb.com/category/hyperlibmooc/
http://tametheweb.com/2013/10/20/hyperlibmooc-library-2-013-presentation-links/
1. principle: contact btw faculty and student. Not in a MOOC. video is the only source provides sense of connection. the casual comments the instructor makes addressing the students provides this sense. Quick response. Collaboration and cooperation in MOOC environment and bring it in a F2F and campus teaching. Feedback for quizzes was not helpful to improve, since it i automated. students at the discussion board were the one who helped. from an instructional design point of view, how MOOC design can be improved.
group exercise, we were split in groups and rotated sheet among each other to log in response to 7 sheets of paper. then each group had to choose the best of the logged responses. the responses will be on the POD site.
eri week resources
Per Keith’s request
“Why Students Avoid Risking Engagement with Innovative Instructional Methods
Donna Ellis, University of Waterloo”
Excerpt From: Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education. “POD Network 2013 Conference Program, Pittsburgh PA 11/7 to 11/10.” iBooks.
This material may be protected by copyright.
A quantitative study. The difficulty of group works. Various questions from the audience, the time of class (early Mrng) is it a reason to increase the students disengagement. Students pereceptions .
The teacher did. It explain why the research and this might have increased the negative perception. Summary of key barrierS.
Risk of negative consequneces
preceived lack of control
contravention of perceived norms.
fishbein and Aizen 2010
discussoon . How faculty can design and deliver the course to minimize the barriers. Our table thought that there are a lot of unknown parameters to decide and it is good to hear the instructor nit only the researcher. How to deal with dysfunctional group members behaviors. Reflections from the faculty member how to response to the data? Some of the barriers frustrated him. Outlines for the assignments only part of the things he had done to mitigate. What are we asking students on course evaluations. Since a lot more then only negative feedback. Instructor needes more training in conflict resolution and how to run group work.
http://ow.ly/i/3Fjqt
http://ow.ly/i/3Fjpq
CRLT Players
Friday, Nov 8, 10:30 AM – 12:00 PM
William Penn Ballroom
7 into 15
CRLT Players, University of Michigan”
Excerpt From: Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education. “POD Network 2013 Conference Program, Pittsburgh PA 11/7 to 11/10.” iBooks.
This material may be protected by copyright.
It is a burlesque and theater approach to engage students and faculty into a conversation. 10 plays in 30 min.
Discuses different topics from the plays and seek solutions as a team. How to deal with international students ( Harvard lady said ” safe places” for students) how to deal with technology or the lack of it, missed next one writing this notes and how to reward faculty in innvative things. T. Encoruage innovation, they received a letter from the provost and if they fail, it is not used in their annual evaluation
No videotaping of this performance because the power is in conversation. Is there a franchise, like training people to do that. NSF grant was allowing them but now just pick up the idea. Sell scripts? Can have conversations about strategies how to collaborate with the theater department where to start these short vinniets. If come to campus and bring performance do they do also the follow up.
Is anger or hostility a reaction during after these presentations. How to handle it. Hostility can be productive and make sure that it is told that it is productive. Getting difficult things out there is what the theater is trying to do in a distant way. This is not a morality
how develop the work? How come up with issues. Faculty bring issues, followed by interviews, draft created we heater identifies the problem and address the issue. Preview performances with stakeholders who confirm . There are more then. Sufficient ideas, so the organizers can choose what they see most pertinent
ecrc committee went to their meeting instead of lunch to see if I can particpirate for next year activitities. Ecrc is the acronym for the tech committee. Web site is one takes of this committee. Word press site , how the groups work, how forms work, how to connect with people and most importantly how to start communicating through the web site and cut the listserv. An attempt to centralized all info in the website rather then scattered across universities.
what is BRL? Google apps and Wikipedia as a wiki for another year until figure out if it can be incorporated in the web site. Reconceptualize how do work in the process. To groups in ecrc. Wikpaidea and web page. And then social media with Amy? Ecrc liaison in every POD committee to understand how to set up the committee web presence. Blackboard collaborate to do meetings and this is what liason explain to committee members. Tinyurl.com/ECRC2013
Designing Online Discussions For Student Engagement And Deep Learning
Friday, Nov 8, 2:15 PM – 3:30 PM, Roundtable
Parkview East
Danilo M Baylen, University of West Georgia”
pit must be asynchronous discussion
What is the purpose and format of the discussion. Assessment. How the online discussion is supporting the purpose of the curriculum to the students learning
About five discussions per semester all together. Behaved part of the class culture
Format of the assignment
asynchronous discussion list. Series of questions or a case study. Is the format a sequence of responses or invite a discussions
checklist which stifles a creative discussion or just let it more free
purpose – must be part of the syllabus and it must be clear.
Meeting learning objectives.
duration
interactivity – response to other students. List of 6 different options how they can reply. what format the interactivity takes Is important issue, which has no textbook
assessment- initial posting are critical, since it gives and idea what to work on. How much points as part of the bigger picture. Yet it is the ground work for the assignment, which gets most points.
metacognitive not evaluative , give students examples from the pro regions class what a good discussion is And explain students how to. Evaluate a good discussion entry
how the question is worded and use the threaded discussion for them to reflect how they think, rather then only assess if they read the chapter. The research about online discussion is very different.
What is the baseline.
Online course must must be set up ready before semester starts or not?
reflection for the end of the semester
SteVn brookfields critical questionaire
meet thISTI and qr standards
is reflection on the content or the process
students reflect on their own reflections
what have you learned about yourself as online learner and look for consistencies for both negative and positive reflections
Assess critical thinking
there is a workshop by the presenters instituitions how to organize
more claims then actual evidence so Data is sought to
main issues
programmatic emportfolio. Not student presentation portfolios, but academic portfolio
e portfolio forum
look at image of the green copy:
1. Integration and reflection
2. Social media – in community with other students , faculty, organizations
3. Resume builder
eportfolio is. Prt of the assessment. Conversation on campus. Some depts use exportfolio extensively but not happy. Programmatic academic e portfolio to collect data
use Sakai open portfolio system
12 drepartments and six more second year. to speak the same language, they developed a guideline, conceptual framework ( see snapshot of handout)
Curriculum mapping ( see the grid on the. Handout) took much longer then expected.
the role of CETL. The provost at Kevin’s institution charged CETL to do the portfolio gig.
The big argument of the CETL redirector with the provost is that portfolio not only to collect data for assessment and accreditation but to provide meaningful experience for the students. EDUCAUSE report horizon, learning analytics Scandalous headlines of students suing law schools. bad deductions made on big data. The things that matte for students must be in the portfolio and they get used to use the portfolio. Pre reflection entries by the students, which shorted the advising sessions. The advisor can see ahead of time. The advisers. Will. B the. Focus point, The. Advising portfolio Is becoming
portfolio must be used by faculty not only students.
Whats the by in for students. Presentations portfolio part of. Marketing purposes. Google sites so when students leave the institutions students can ” take” the portfolio with them as we’ll go multimedia. attempts failed because platforms which can be cutozmized we’re not used Digital identity As CETL director not technology expect and how to learn from the faculty and that was very
documenting and learning with eportfolios.
faculty to demonstrate reflections to students and how enter into portfolio. Using rubrics. Faculty are using already tools but connecting with. Reflections.
STAR: Situation , tasks, action, response
Writing skills differentiate, but even good writers got better on reflection
how one polish a portfolio before bringing to an Employer. Student Working with career services to polish and proofread.
How much the university is responsible for an individual portfolio. How many levels of proof reading.
Poor student work reflects a poor faculty attention.
Lorna Kearns, University of Pittsburgh”
Freedom to Breathe: A Discussion about Prioritizing Your Center’s Work
Andy Goodman and Susan Shadle, Boise State University
Connecting, Risking, and Learning: A Panel Conversation about Social Media
Michelle Rodems, University of Louisville. Conference C 9:00 AM – 10:15 AM
The use of social media in higher education
Conference C 9-11:15 AM
Panel of CETL directors and faculty. The guy from Notre dame uses word press the same way I use it. Collect questions and after the 3rd one creates blog entry and answers the next q/ s with the URL to the blog entry NspireD is the name of. The blog
the OHIO state UCAT guy is a twitter guy. Program coordinator who manages wordpress and web site. Intersect with FB and twitter. Platforms are inteGrated, so be did not to know the technicalities. The graduate consultants are setting up. ciirdinator tried to understand how the mesh together. Can be used as conversation starters or to broadcast and share info. Use of hashtags how to use them appropriate in twitter and FB to streamline .
Scsu problem. W don’t build it they will not come. a Tim burton version of the field of dreams.
Rachel CETL assist dir at U of Michigan. She is out there personally likes it. Very static web page. Drupal as a content management system so the blog is part of the web page. So 2 times a week entries. One of the staff people is an editor and writes blog posts, but vetted by a second CETL staff. Auto push for the blog to the twitter. Screencasts for YouTube channel with screencasts. Comments on the blog minimal from faculty and stat. What about students? About 1000 followers on the twitter. What do analytics say. Hits on home page, but no idea how much time reading. The time people spend more time and using the tags . the use of blog is less formal way to share information. recycling in December and August a lot of material.
does anybody subscribe and do you promote RSS
the separate blog for a workshop requires interaction and that is a success
for faculty development U of Michigan is using blog recruited 50 to follow the blog. TSam of 3 using. WordPress For a semester and then survey. Focus group. Huge success, between 6 and 30 comments. Community with no other space on campus
how are u using social media to promote connections. elevate voices of others on campus by interviewing faculty. At U of Michigan there was no interest to learn about what other faculty are doing. So they trashed that initiative but starTed a video narration about faculty who innovate. Videotaped and edited no hi Qual video , tagged and blog posted and this approach created more connection, because it is not text only.
What have been the obstacles and indoor failure and what have you learned?
convincing the administration that CETL than do it and it does not have to be the same quality as the web page and the printed material. Changing the mindset. No assessment, since nothing else was working and they were ready for radical step such as blog
Same with the twitter. Taking the risk to experiment with the hashtags. Tweets can’t be approved. Need to time to build an audience, one month will not have an impact. Start with the. Notion that you are building a reposIvory noT a foRum
one of the panelist has a google spreadsheet which has information of allCETL social media sites There are resources on how to deal with negative outcomes of using social media. Working with librarians, the Norte dame said! they will give you twenty sources. No no, no, he siad, give me your best three.
U of MichiGan more grad studns blog guest posts almost no faculty.
Have you considered giving them more then guest blog, but no facilitator? Let faculty once a semester do a blog post. It is not moderated but more like lead to how to do a good blog. Interview based approach is unique and does not show up somewhere elSe.
Insitutional background important in these decisions.
How often refresh the wordpress page. How often one person is voicing and it takes a log of journalistic skills. Use the draft option to publish when there are several ideas coming at once.
Mindshift of CETL is to decrease the standards. Make it more informal. Blog post can be always fixed later. To avoid faculty false perception that this is not scholarly needs to be references. So causal tone + references.
Blog ” from students perspective” is repurposE
Risking Together: Cultivating Connection and Learning for Faculty Teaching Online
Michaella Thornton, Christopher Grabau, and Jerod Quinn, Saint Louis University
Oliver 9-11:15 AM
Space Matters! and Is There a Simple Formula to Understand and Improve Student Motivation
Kathleen Kane and Leslie A. Lopez, University of Hawaii at Manoa
Riverboat 9:00 AM – 10:15 AM
The Risks and Rewards of Becoming a Campus Change Agent
Dr. Adrianna Kezar, University of Southern California
William Penn Ballroom 10:30 AM – 12:00 PM
Branch campuses, students abroad, to more with less, completion from profit institutions
students work more but this is a good reflection on learning success
provost might ask to consolidate prof development opportunities for faculty and students instead of faculty only.
If administration is genuine understand transparent Administration more about persuading not listening. Respect, not assuming that faculty will not accept it. If faculty will sacrifices what will faculty see the administration sacrifice on their side. Leading from the. Middle , it means collective vision for the future. Multilevel leadershup, top down efforts dont work and bottom top are fragile. Managing up is less preferred then powering up. It is difficult to tell administration that they miss or misunderstand the technology issue.
Four frames. Goal multi frame leadership http://www.tnellen.com/ted/tc/bolman.html. Vey much the same as Jim Collins good to great right people on the bus right trained http://www.afa1976.org/Portals/0/documents/Essentials/Creating%20Organizational%20Learning%20and%20Change.pdf
How to build coalition, different perspectives, aknowledge the inherent conflict.
The Delphi project
It Takes a Campus: Promoting Information Literacy through Collaboration
Karla Fribley and Karen St. Clair, Emerson College
Oakmont 1:45 PM – 3:00 PM
Most of the attendees and both presenters were librarians
The presenters played a scatch to involve the particppaints
deifnition what is IL. https://mobile.twitter.com/search/?q=%23POD13&s=hash
http://ow.ly/i/3G00e/original
Information literacy collaborative work with faculty to design student learning outocmes for information literacy
Guiding principles by backward course design
Where they see students struggle with research
question to students survey, what is most difficult for your and wordle.
http://ow.ly/i/3G0l6/original
self reflection ow.ly/i/3G0UH
Curriculum mapping to identify which courses are the stretigic ones to instill the non credit info litreacy
acrl assessment in action
Risky Business: Supporting Institutional Data Gathering in Faculty Development Centers
Meghan Burke and Tom Pusateri, Kennesaw State University
Oliver 1:45 PM – 3:00 PM Roundtable
Exploring Issues of Perceptual Bias and International Faculty
Shivanthi Anandan, Drexel University.
Heinz 3:15 PM – 4:30 PM Roundtable
Why do we need it and onoy regarding international faculty don’t in Kim Lisa wolf-wendel
susan twombly. Pointers for hiring and retention. Performance is both teaching and living. Sanitary effect. sanitary issues not only pay rate. FLC all tenure track without citizenship they are worried about their tenure. Funding agencies, very few will fund you if you are not a citizenship
Diane Schafer perceptual biases, graffiti. Cathryn Ross
Averting Death by PowerPoint! From Killer Professors to Killer Presenters
Christy Price, Dalton State College
Riverboat 4:45 PM – 6:00 PM
How to create effective mini lectures checklist for acting palnning
engage and leave lecture out. The reason why can’t move away is because some people lecture as performance art
Make lectures mini. How long mini should be. 22 min, the age number of the person.
Emotional appeal, empathy.
Evoke positive emotions with humor. Always mixed method research, since the narrative Berk, r. (2000) and Sousa (2011)
ethical. Obligations and emotional appeal
acknowledge the opposition
enhance memory processing with visuals and multimedia
use guided practice by miniki zing note taking
presentationzen is a book! which need to read http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/presentation-zen-garr-reynolds/1100391495?ean=9780321525659
Enchanted memory processing by creating mistery
address relevance
http://advanceyourslides.com/2011/01/28/the-5-most-memorable-concepts-from-nancy-duartes-new-book-resonate/
Death by PowerPoint: Nancy Duarte: The secret structure of great talks
http://www.ted.com/talks/nancy_duarte_the_secret_structure_of_great_talks.html
http://www.gobookee.org/get_book.php?u=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5vcGVuaXNibi5jb20vZG93bmxvYWQvMDQ3MDYzMjAxMS5wZGYKVGl0bGU6IFJlc29uYXRlOiBQcmVzZW50IFZpc3VhbCBTdG9yaWVzIFRoYXQgVHJhbnNmb3JtIC4uLg==
Engage faculty by showing. Faculty how their presentation. Is. And how it c can be
process with clickers
Sunday Mrng session
vygotsky zone of NAND the flipped mindset. http://t.co/vCI8TOJ7J2. Cool tweets at #pod13.
Ideas process baudler Boyd stromle 2013
I – identify the issue
D debrief the situation
A analyze what happened
s strategize solutions and Oport unities for growth and future success
Our Bodies Encoded: Algorithmic Test Proctoring in Higher Education
https://hybridpedagogy.org/our-bodies-encoded-algorithmic-test-proctoring-in-higher-education/
While in-person test proctoring has been used to combat test-based cheating, this can be difficult to translate to online courses. Ed-tech companies have sought to address this concern by offering to watch students take online tests, in real time, through their webcams.
Some of the more prominent companies offering these services include Proctorio, Respondus, ProctorU, HonorLock, Kryterion Global Testing Solutions, and Examity.
Algorithmic test proctoring’s settings have discriminatory consequences across multiple identities and serious privacy implications.
While racist technology calibrated for white skin isn’t new (everything from photography to soap dispensers do this), we see it deployed through face detection and facial recognition used by algorithmic proctoring systems.
While some test proctoring companies develop their own facial recognition software, most purchase software developed by other companies, but these technologies generally function similarly and have shown a consistent inability to identify people with darker skin or even tell the difference between Chinese people. Facial recognition literally encodes the invisibility of Black people and the racist stereotype that all Asian people look the same.
As Os Keyes has demonstrated, facial recognition has a terrible history with gender. This means that a software asking students to verify their identity is compromising for students who identify as trans, non-binary, or express their gender in ways counter to cis/heteronormativity.
These features and settings create a system of asymmetric surveillance and lack of accountability, things which have always created a risk for abuse and sexual harassment. Technologies like these have a long history of being abused, largely by heterosexual men at the expense of women’s bodies, privacy, and dignity.
Their promotional messaging functions similarly to dog whistle politics which is commonly used in anti-immigration rhetoric. It’s also not a coincidence that these technologies are being used to exclude people not wanted by an institution; biometrics and facial recognition have been connected to anti-immigration policies, supported by both Republican and Democratic administrations, going back to the 1990’s.
Borrowing from Henry A. Giroux, Kevin Seeber describes the pedagogy of punishment and some of its consequences in regards to higher education’s approach to plagiarism in his book chapter “The Failed Pedagogy of Punishment: Moving Discussions of Plagiarism beyond Detection and Discipline.”
my note: I am repeating this for years
Sean Michael Morris and Jesse Stommel’s ongoing critique of Turnitin, a plagiarism detection software, outlines exactly how this logic operates in ed-tech and higher education: 1) don’t trust students, 2) surveil them, 3) ignore the complexity of writing and citation, and 4) monetize the data.
Technological Solutionism
Cheating is not a technological problem, but a social and pedagogical problem.
Our habit of believing that technology will solve pedagogical problems is endemic to narratives produced by the ed-tech community and, as Audrey Watters writes, is tied to the Silicon Valley culture that often funds it. Scholars have been dismantling the narrative of technological solutionism and neutrality for some time now. In her book “Algorithms of Oppression,” Safiya Umoja Noble demonstrates how the algorithms that are responsible for Google Search amplify and “reinforce oppressive social relationships and enact new modes of racial profiling.”
Anna Lauren Hoffmann, who coined the term “data violence” to describe the impact harmful technological systems have on people and how these systems retain the appearance of objectivity despite the disproportionate harm they inflict on marginalized communities.
This system of measuring bodies and behaviors, associating certain bodies and behaviors with desirability and others with inferiority, engages in what Lennard J. Davis calls the Eugenic Gaze.
Higher education is deeply complicit in the eugenics movement. Nazism borrowed many of its ideas about racial purity from the American school of eugenics, and universities were instrumental in supporting eugenics research by publishing copious literature on it, establishing endowed professorships, institutes, and scholarly societies that spearheaded eugenic research and propaganda.
+++++++++++++++++
more on privacy in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=privacy
