Just testing out a free online polling tool called Flisti. Very quick, and no sign-ups required....
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Online Learning: Content & Design
I hope you enjoy this video on online learning!
Video Credits
I would like to thank the following people and organizations for their contributions to this video.
Photo Credits
OZinOH
James Sarmiento
Shanghai Daddy
Estatevaults
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Tywkiwdbi
Gulf Coast Regional Blood Center
iClipArt
Video Clips
Edutopia: Project-Based Learning Clips
Interviews, Video Participants
Jon Voss
Jon Fila
Paul Bennett
Max Smart
References
Bird, L. (2007). The 3 "C" design model for networked collaborative e-learning: A tool for novice designers. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(2), 153-167. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Hannum, W.H., & McCombs, B.L. (2008). Enhancing distance learning with learner-centered principles. Educational Technology, 48(4), 11-21.
Robins, D. & Holmes, J. (2008). Aesthetics and credibility in website design. Information Processing and Management, 44, p. 386-399.
Scribner, D. E., (2007). High school students’ perceptions: Supporting motivation to engage and persist in learning (Doctoral Dissertation). Capella University, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Tractinsky, N., Katz, A., & Ikar, D. (2000) What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers, 13(2), 127-145.
University of Indianapolis. (2009). Summary of project-based learning. Center of Excellence in Leadership of Learning. Retrieved from: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcell.uindy.edu%2Fdocs%2FPBL%2520research%2520summary.pdf&rct=j&q=University%20of%20Indianapolis.%20(2009).%20Summary%20of%20project-based%20learning.&ei=qbhcTdC9IsqCtgf5lMXaCg&usg=AFQjCNHXNElLRhYpxdq_Z2WY3ONXFhy_rw&sig2=16v-VO_mFzL7WjDDUoxz1A&cad=rja
Watson, J., Murin, A., Vashaw, L., Gemin, B., & Rapp, C. (2010). Keeping pace with K-12 online learning: An annual review of state-level policy and practice. Vienna, VA: North American Council for Online Learning. Retrieved from http://www.kpk12.com/wp-content/uploads/KeepingPaceK12_2010.pdf
Zhang, P. (2009). Theorizing the relationship between affect and aesthetics in the ICT design and use context. Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Information Resources Management, (pp 1-15). Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Annotations
Bird, L. (2007). The 3 "C" design model for networked collaborative e-learning: A tool for novice designers. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(2), 153-167. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Bird builds a theoretical argument based on research for a new approach to online learning course design. In his model, he argues for a three pronged approach that focuses on content, which is the fundamental knowledge in the course, construction, which is new knowledge built through engaging in the course, and consolidation, which describes the process of fusing together knowledge after a meaningful learning experience.
Bird’s argument is certainly logical, and I found it insightful to look at learning through this lens. However, I’m not sure that I can agree fully with the definitions that he argues for. Intuitively, it seems like the boundaries are somewhat ill defined, and that a sharper model or a refined model is needed to strengthen his argument.
Hannum, W.H., & McCombs, B.L. (2008). Enhancing distance learning with learner-centered principles. Educational Technology, 48(4), 11-21.
Hannum and McCombs use a summary of current research in distance learning and student motivation to build and argument for designing online courses that are based on 14 learner-centered principles such as strategic thinking and construction of knowledge. They conclude that distance learning and course design must take into considerations the needs, motivations, and goals of learners in order to be successful in today’s cultural climate.
I thought this article was a precise and logical blueprint for engaging students by involving students’ goals and needs in the learning process. They lay a strong research foundation for their argument and stayed within the implications of the research nicely. My only critique of the article would be that several of the learner-centered principles could benefit from sharper definitions and clarifications, but this is perhaps to be expected given the limitations of the length of the article.
Robins, D. & Holmes, J. (2008). Aesthetics and credibility in website design. Information Processing and Management, 44, p. 386-399.
Robins and Holmes conducted a study in which 20 subjects evaluate the credibility of websites based on their aesthetic appeal. The study was excellently presented in the article, and it was a particular pleasure to read the precise writing, which made understanding both the study and its findings a straightforward process. The study concluded that aesthetics have a direct and strong impact on perceived credibility of a particular organization. Even in cases where credibility scored low, aesthetics raised the credibility of a site. This would imply that focusing on aesthetics is vital for a broad range of Internet applications.
I found this study to be particularly well developed, presented, and executed. The authors thought of everything, and were particularly clear in presenting their results.
Scribner, D. E., (2007). High school students’ perceptions: Supporting motivation to engage and persist in learning (Doctoral Dissertation). Capella University, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Scribner’s doctoral thesis is an extensive, well-detailed, and comprehensive examination of high school students’ perceptions towards online learning. She interviewed 200 students from Virtual High School and builds a strong collection of data for examination. She then proceeds to draw a wide range of compelling conclusions from the research. Of particular note are her findings that course design, a variety of activities, and a welcoming, student-centered focus are key elements to eliciting student engagement in a course. Overall, I was very impressed with both the extent and quality of her work, and was particularly pleased that it connected directly to my video topic.
Tractinsky, N., Katz, A., & Ikar, D. (2000) What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers, 13(2), 127-145.
The authors conducted an experiment where they measured the relationship between aesthetics and usability. In the study, participants used different designs of an Automated Teller Machine interface to conduct simple tasks while the researchers measured various activities and perceptions. They found that aesthetics play a large role in how a user interacts with an interface.
While I found the methodology and results of the study well expressed, I do question the narrowness of the study. I would challenge the authors to expand the scope of future studies. Having said this, the study does add to the growing body of knowledge pointing to the critical nature of interface design and human interaction.
Watson, J., Murin, A., Vashaw, L., Gemin, B., & Rapp, C. (2010). Keeping pace with K-12 online learning: An annual review of state-level policy and practice. Vienna, VA: North American Council for Online Learning. Retrieved from http://www.kpk12.com/wp-content/uploads/KeepingPaceK12_2010.pdf
Keeping Pace 2010 is this year’s version of the iNacol-sponsored examination of the current state of online learning in the United States. The massive report examines data collected from hundreds of sources and compiles them into an extensive report chronicling trends and patterns in online learning.
From and information standpoint, Keeping Pace 2010 is a helpful bounty of information, but occasionally I question the conclusions the study draws. For example, it’s often implied that Minnesota is behind other states because it doesn’t have a state online learning program, but that to a large degree is intentional. The state has a thriving online system, just not a centralized one.
Video Credits
I would like to thank the following people and organizations for their contributions to this video.
Photo Credits
OZinOH
James Sarmiento
Shanghai Daddy
Estatevaults
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Tywkiwdbi
Gulf Coast Regional Blood Center
iClipArt
Video Clips
Edutopia: Project-Based Learning Clips
Interviews, Video Participants
Jon Voss
Jon Fila
Paul Bennett
Max Smart
References
Bird, L. (2007). The 3 "C" design model for networked collaborative e-learning: A tool for novice designers. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(2), 153-167. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Hannum, W.H., & McCombs, B.L. (2008). Enhancing distance learning with learner-centered principles. Educational Technology, 48(4), 11-21.
Robins, D. & Holmes, J. (2008). Aesthetics and credibility in website design. Information Processing and Management, 44, p. 386-399.
Scribner, D. E., (2007). High school students’ perceptions: Supporting motivation to engage and persist in learning (Doctoral Dissertation). Capella University, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Tractinsky, N., Katz, A., & Ikar, D. (2000) What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers, 13(2), 127-145.
University of Indianapolis. (2009). Summary of project-based learning. Center of Excellence in Leadership of Learning. Retrieved from: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcell.uindy.edu%2Fdocs%2FPBL%2520research%2520summary.pdf&rct=j&q=University%20of%20Indianapolis.%20(2009).%20Summary%20of%20project-based%20learning.&ei=qbhcTdC9IsqCtgf5lMXaCg&usg=AFQjCNHXNElLRhYpxdq_Z2WY3ONXFhy_rw&sig2=16v-VO_mFzL7WjDDUoxz1A&cad=rja
Watson, J., Murin, A., Vashaw, L., Gemin, B., & Rapp, C. (2010). Keeping pace with K-12 online learning: An annual review of state-level policy and practice. Vienna, VA: North American Council for Online Learning. Retrieved from http://www.kpk12.com/wp-content/uploads/KeepingPaceK12_2010.pdf
Zhang, P. (2009). Theorizing the relationship between affect and aesthetics in the ICT design and use context. Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Information Resources Management, (pp 1-15). Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Annotations
Bird, L. (2007). The 3 "C" design model for networked collaborative e-learning: A tool for novice designers. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(2), 153-167. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Bird builds a theoretical argument based on research for a new approach to online learning course design. In his model, he argues for a three pronged approach that focuses on content, which is the fundamental knowledge in the course, construction, which is new knowledge built through engaging in the course, and consolidation, which describes the process of fusing together knowledge after a meaningful learning experience.
Bird’s argument is certainly logical, and I found it insightful to look at learning through this lens. However, I’m not sure that I can agree fully with the definitions that he argues for. Intuitively, it seems like the boundaries are somewhat ill defined, and that a sharper model or a refined model is needed to strengthen his argument.
Hannum, W.H., & McCombs, B.L. (2008). Enhancing distance learning with learner-centered principles. Educational Technology, 48(4), 11-21.
Hannum and McCombs use a summary of current research in distance learning and student motivation to build and argument for designing online courses that are based on 14 learner-centered principles such as strategic thinking and construction of knowledge. They conclude that distance learning and course design must take into considerations the needs, motivations, and goals of learners in order to be successful in today’s cultural climate.
I thought this article was a precise and logical blueprint for engaging students by involving students’ goals and needs in the learning process. They lay a strong research foundation for their argument and stayed within the implications of the research nicely. My only critique of the article would be that several of the learner-centered principles could benefit from sharper definitions and clarifications, but this is perhaps to be expected given the limitations of the length of the article.
Robins, D. & Holmes, J. (2008). Aesthetics and credibility in website design. Information Processing and Management, 44, p. 386-399.
Robins and Holmes conducted a study in which 20 subjects evaluate the credibility of websites based on their aesthetic appeal. The study was excellently presented in the article, and it was a particular pleasure to read the precise writing, which made understanding both the study and its findings a straightforward process. The study concluded that aesthetics have a direct and strong impact on perceived credibility of a particular organization. Even in cases where credibility scored low, aesthetics raised the credibility of a site. This would imply that focusing on aesthetics is vital for a broad range of Internet applications.
I found this study to be particularly well developed, presented, and executed. The authors thought of everything, and were particularly clear in presenting their results.
Scribner, D. E., (2007). High school students’ perceptions: Supporting motivation to engage and persist in learning (Doctoral Dissertation). Capella University, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Scribner’s doctoral thesis is an extensive, well-detailed, and comprehensive examination of high school students’ perceptions towards online learning. She interviewed 200 students from Virtual High School and builds a strong collection of data for examination. She then proceeds to draw a wide range of compelling conclusions from the research. Of particular note are her findings that course design, a variety of activities, and a welcoming, student-centered focus are key elements to eliciting student engagement in a course. Overall, I was very impressed with both the extent and quality of her work, and was particularly pleased that it connected directly to my video topic.
Tractinsky, N., Katz, A., & Ikar, D. (2000) What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers, 13(2), 127-145.
The authors conducted an experiment where they measured the relationship between aesthetics and usability. In the study, participants used different designs of an Automated Teller Machine interface to conduct simple tasks while the researchers measured various activities and perceptions. They found that aesthetics play a large role in how a user interacts with an interface.
While I found the methodology and results of the study well expressed, I do question the narrowness of the study. I would challenge the authors to expand the scope of future studies. Having said this, the study does add to the growing body of knowledge pointing to the critical nature of interface design and human interaction.
Watson, J., Murin, A., Vashaw, L., Gemin, B., & Rapp, C. (2010). Keeping pace with K-12 online learning: An annual review of state-level policy and practice. Vienna, VA: North American Council for Online Learning. Retrieved from http://www.kpk12.com/wp-content/uploads/KeepingPaceK12_2010.pdf
Keeping Pace 2010 is this year’s version of the iNacol-sponsored examination of the current state of online learning in the United States. The massive report examines data collected from hundreds of sources and compiles them into an extensive report chronicling trends and patterns in online learning.
From and information standpoint, Keeping Pace 2010 is a helpful bounty of information, but occasionally I question the conclusions the study draws. For example, it’s often implied that Minnesota is behind other states because it doesn’t have a state online learning program, but that to a large degree is intentional. The state has a thriving online system, just not a centralized one.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Static and Dynamic Learning Technologies
To see the image at full size, click on it or go to this public Google doc.
Reflection
In twenty-four years of teaching, I've made lots of mistakes, but I think that one thing that I got right was to always place an strong emphasis on active and dynamic learning experiences in my classes. At first, however, I think I made the mistake of thinking that it was important that I as a teacher be active and dynamic in how I taught. Over the years, I realized that the better question to ask is "How dynamic and active are my students?" With that in mind, I've worked hard to keep my classes as far towards the dynamic end of things as possible. I'm very much an advocate, for example, of Clay Shirky's position that social media has the potential to alter the world. With that said, I think we tend to teach as we were taught, and it's constantly been a struggle for me to keep pushing the edge of the envelope in terms of engaging content and dynamic learning experiences.
I especially struggled when I created my first online course. It was as if I'd forgotten everything I learned from teaching traditional classes, and Moller's (2008) point that we move toward the future with our eye on the past was never more apparent. The course was filled with multiple-choice quizzes and PDF files. In my defense, the technology was not there yet even to deliver reliable video content. The dynamic tools currently available to online teachers simply weren't available then. But what was equally apparent as I look back on that course was that I didn't have a dynamic approach to the class either. As I gained more experience, I think I've been able to build more dynamic learning experiences into the courses that I work on.
Through taking this course, I've become exposed to even more tools for allowing students to create dynamic content, and I'm excited to try to implement them in my classes. I've greatly appreciated the opportunity to incorporate these tools into my learning experiences.
I'd also like to offer up a couple of observations on making the dynamic-static mind map...
First, it struck me that many of the tools could easily go into more than one place. Google Docs, for example, could easily only be used as a static technology for storage and display of non-editable documents. At the same time, you could employ Google Docs as a real-time collaborative tool. In the same way, Google Docs could easily be a tool for content-sharing rather than just collaboration.
Second, the hardest section for me to fill out was the static collaborative tools section. It almost seems as if those places are contradictions in terms. Collaboration, by its nature, implies interaction and dynamic activity. In the end, however, I realized that many of the places where we store our creative works are perhaps the best examples of places where collaboration occurs, but in very much a one-way direction.
References
Moller, L. (2008). Static and dynamic technological tools. [Unpublished Paper]. Retrieved from: http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/courses/14936/CRS-WUEDUC8812-3730064/8842_M5_Paper.pdf
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Engaging Learners with New Strategies and Tools
I've embedded an interactive graphic organizer made with Prezi for this blog assignment. If you're not familiar with Prezi, there are just a couple of things to be aware of to view the organizer easily. Both the Reflection section and the Why/Benefits section of the assignment are inside the Prezi.
Recommended Viewing Instructions
Thanks!
Recommended Viewing Instructions
- Click on the arrow in the bottom middle of the Prezi to activate the organizer.
- After you click on the main arrow, you'll see some more menu options appear. Click on the light gray "More" in the bottom right of the Prezi window, then select "Full Screen."
- Click on the Arrow in the bottom middle of the screen to move through the graphic organizer.
- To see it all, keep clicking until you see "The End."
Thanks!
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Assessing Collaborative Efforts
Our blog assignment for this week asks some very interesting questions along the lines of how we should assess participation in a collaborative learning community.
My initial response to the question is along the lines of what Siemens (n.d.) argues, that participation implies effort and time involved in an activity, and that measures of participation such as time on task, frequency of posting, etc., can be tracked and assessed easily online more in terms of effort than of quality.
But I think to a degree this misses the point, and I think that a better question to ask is how do we go about assessing the quality of the collaborative input of an individual in a group. We've all been in groups where someone participates too much, dominates the conversation, or whose contributions to a project, if adopted, would actually end up making the project worse.
The reason education falls into the trap of assessing participation in collaborative efforts rather than quality of participation in collaborative efforts lies in the fact that education has a long history of being very good at assessing and measuring individual effort and quality, but largely has no idea how to go about measuring the quality of individual contributions to things like brainstorming sessions, or collaboratively written documents. In essence, I'd argue that vast majority of teachers would be overwhelmed if asked to measure individual contributions in a group.
First of all, it's extremely hard to do. As a Japanese teacher, I'd often ask students to give group performances, and it became clear early on that measuring an individual performance when five students are doing something at the same time was impossible for one person to do. In order to assess it properly, I'd have to record the event, then watch it five times, measuring each individual performance separately. The trickier part would come when one person's performance suffered because another person wasn't up to par. At times, it was like evaluating a wide receiver who caught no passes because his quarterback overthrew him ten times. What do you do then?
The answer to this, though, lies in efforts by education to be more purposeful in identifying the pieces that go into effective groups and then specifically teaching and measuring those skills. It's a tremendously overlooked field of research, with the well known Johnson and Johnson perhaps still at the forefront of this work. XteAchnology has a good article summing up the complexity of their work in dissecting the key elements of effective groups and coming up with ways of purposefully teaching and assessing collaborative skills and efforts. In recent years, more research and resources are available to teachers in the field on cooperative learning. The blog Teacher Reboot Camp, for example, has a great post listing a treasure trove of resources to learn more about cooperative learning.
But even if you teach group skills, the question that often comes up is what to do with the student who doesn't participate. In such cases, I think it's the responsibility of the teacher to get involved and discuss with the student his or her options. From a personal viewpoint, I don't think participation is negotiable, although as a teacher I would often make accommodations and do everything in my power to help the student build the skills to participate effectively and for the group to function well. Palloff & Pratt (2007) provide many examples of steps a teacher can take to monitor and build groups, such as encouraging neither too little or too much participation, etc. The bottom line, however, is that human beings need to function both individually and in groups, and participation in group projects that gets excused isn't doing anyone a favor.
References
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Siemens, G. (n.d.). Assessment of collaborative learning [vodcast]. Laureate Education. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4692780&Survey=1&47=6562140&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
Terrell, S. (2010, November 19). Cooperative learning: effective team work! 20+ resources. [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://teacherbootcamp.edublogs.org/2010/11/19/cooperative-learning-effective-team-work-15-resources/
XteAchnology. (n.d.). Johnson and Johnson's thoughts on cooperative learning. Retrieved January 11, 2011, from http://www.teach-nology.com/currenttrends/cooperative_learning/johnson_and_johnson/
My initial response to the question is along the lines of what Siemens (n.d.) argues, that participation implies effort and time involved in an activity, and that measures of participation such as time on task, frequency of posting, etc., can be tracked and assessed easily online more in terms of effort than of quality.
But I think to a degree this misses the point, and I think that a better question to ask is how do we go about assessing the quality of the collaborative input of an individual in a group. We've all been in groups where someone participates too much, dominates the conversation, or whose contributions to a project, if adopted, would actually end up making the project worse.
The reason education falls into the trap of assessing participation in collaborative efforts rather than quality of participation in collaborative efforts lies in the fact that education has a long history of being very good at assessing and measuring individual effort and quality, but largely has no idea how to go about measuring the quality of individual contributions to things like brainstorming sessions, or collaboratively written documents. In essence, I'd argue that vast majority of teachers would be overwhelmed if asked to measure individual contributions in a group.
First of all, it's extremely hard to do. As a Japanese teacher, I'd often ask students to give group performances, and it became clear early on that measuring an individual performance when five students are doing something at the same time was impossible for one person to do. In order to assess it properly, I'd have to record the event, then watch it five times, measuring each individual performance separately. The trickier part would come when one person's performance suffered because another person wasn't up to par. At times, it was like evaluating a wide receiver who caught no passes because his quarterback overthrew him ten times. What do you do then?
The answer to this, though, lies in efforts by education to be more purposeful in identifying the pieces that go into effective groups and then specifically teaching and measuring those skills. It's a tremendously overlooked field of research, with the well known Johnson and Johnson perhaps still at the forefront of this work. XteAchnology has a good article summing up the complexity of their work in dissecting the key elements of effective groups and coming up with ways of purposefully teaching and assessing collaborative skills and efforts. In recent years, more research and resources are available to teachers in the field on cooperative learning. The blog Teacher Reboot Camp, for example, has a great post listing a treasure trove of resources to learn more about cooperative learning.
But even if you teach group skills, the question that often comes up is what to do with the student who doesn't participate. In such cases, I think it's the responsibility of the teacher to get involved and discuss with the student his or her options. From a personal viewpoint, I don't think participation is negotiable, although as a teacher I would often make accommodations and do everything in my power to help the student build the skills to participate effectively and for the group to function well. Palloff & Pratt (2007) provide many examples of steps a teacher can take to monitor and build groups, such as encouraging neither too little or too much participation, etc. The bottom line, however, is that human beings need to function both individually and in groups, and participation in group projects that gets excused isn't doing anyone a favor.
References
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Siemens, G. (n.d.). Assessment of collaborative learning [vodcast]. Laureate Education. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4692780&Survey=1&47=6562140&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
Terrell, S. (2010, November 19). Cooperative learning: effective team work! 20+ resources. [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://teacherbootcamp.edublogs.org/2010/11/19/cooperative-learning-effective-team-work-15-resources/
XteAchnology. (n.d.). Johnson and Johnson's thoughts on cooperative learning. Retrieved January 11, 2011, from http://www.teach-nology.com/currenttrends/cooperative_learning/johnson_and_johnson/
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Quality Instructional Design for Online Courses
Video Presentation Storyboard
General Overview
The main goal of the video is to introduce various concepts of quality instructional design for online courses. The production will highlight several improvements in online content design and online course design that can improve student learning.
(1 minute, 30 seconds) Introduction and Overview
Sequence #1: Title (10 seconds)
Working Title: "Quality Instructional Design: The Fundamentals"
Overview: A Title
Method: Simple Title Screen and Text
Sequence #2: Introduction (20 seconds)
Overview: This section will present a historical perspective on education.
Method: My voiceover combined with a collage of educational screenshots.
Sequence #3: Educational Transformation (20 seconds)
Overview: This section will pull figures from various sources describing the growth in online learning as a reflection of the growth in the Internet and growth in Communication
Method: Facts and figures, with an animation of reflecting the growth in online learning.
Sequence #4: Introduction of Question (10 seconds)
Overview: This section poses the question "What are the critical factors in instructional design that lead to quality online learning experiences?" It will also pose the three tenets of the answer: design, content, and interface
Method: Simple Title Screen and Text
Sequence #5: Definition of Online Learning (30 seconds)
Overview: This section will define "online learning" as used in the presentation. It will highlight some of the aspects of online learning (100% online schools, supplementary courses, hybrid)
Method: Computer Animation (perhaps Flash or a video segment of a Prezi or Google Presentation)
(2 minutes) Content is King...
Sequence #1: Equivalency Theory (30 seconds)
Overview: This section will focus on the goal inherent in Simonson's Equivalency Theory, that online courses must be equal yet different than traditional courses.
Method: Simple Title Screen and Text.
Sequence #2: Bloom's Taxonomy & Relevance to Online Learning (30 seconds)
Overview: This section will present the challenge facing online courses. Online learning must drive us higher on Bloom's Taxonomy. Quizzing facts in an online environment, for example, is ineffective due to the fact that anyone can just look up the answers.
Method: Student Interview, simple graphics.
Sequence #3: Project-Based Learning & Challenge-Based Learning (1 minute)
Overview: This section will argue that project-based learning is an effective way to push students higher on Bloom's Taxonomy, and is an effective tool for online learning.
Method: Teacher Interview, Edutopia clip showing students engaged in project-based learning. Voiceover. Simple graphics.
(2 minutes) ...but Design is Key
Sequence #1: Design is Key Introduction (30 seconds)
Overview: This section will introduce the importance of design in online courses. It will present research showing its importance (research to still be done).
Method: Simple Title Screen and Text, Examples from Courses.
Sequence #2: Failures of Design Case Study (30 seconds)
Overview: This section will show how poor design impacts students learning by highlighting a case study of an ineffectively designed course.
Method: Online course screen capture video showing an example of a failure of design.
Sequence #3: Fundamentals of Instructional Design (1 minute)
Overview: This section will outline several elements of instructional design that can improve the quality of online courses. It will take about incorporating discussions, graphics, and a design framework to enhance student learning (research forthcoming).
Method: Simple Title Screen and Text, Examples from Courses.
(30 seconds) Conclusion
Sequence #1: Design is Key Introduction (1 minute)
Overview: This section will review the points made in the concepts and design section, pose questions surrounding what is left to learn regarding the creation of engaging online content.
Method: Not sure yet, perhaps a collage of happy student photos? Or a collage of technology-related photos focusing the viewer on the continuing rise in technology.
References
Christiansen, C., Johnson, C.W., & Horn, M. (2008). Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Simonson, M. (n.d.). Distance education: Higher education, K12, and the corporate world [vodcast]. Laureate Education. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4692780&Survey=1&47=6562140&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
Video Presentation Storyboard
General Overview
The main goal of the video is to introduce various concepts of quality instructional design for online courses. The production will highlight several improvements in online content design and online course design that can improve student learning.
(1 minute, 30 seconds) Introduction and Overview
Sequence #1: Title (10 seconds)
Working Title: "Quality Instructional Design: The Fundamentals"
Overview: A Title
Method: Simple Title Screen and Text
Sequence #2: Introduction (20 seconds)
Overview: This section will present a historical perspective on education.
Method: My voiceover combined with a collage of educational screenshots.
Sequence #3: Educational Transformation (20 seconds)
Overview: This section will pull figures from various sources describing the growth in online learning as a reflection of the growth in the Internet and growth in Communication
Method: Facts and figures, with an animation of reflecting the growth in online learning.
Sequence #4: Introduction of Question (10 seconds)
Overview: This section poses the question "What are the critical factors in instructional design that lead to quality online learning experiences?" It will also pose the three tenets of the answer: design, content, and interface
Method: Simple Title Screen and Text
Sequence #5: Definition of Online Learning (30 seconds)
Overview: This section will define "online learning" as used in the presentation. It will highlight some of the aspects of online learning (100% online schools, supplementary courses, hybrid)
Method: Computer Animation (perhaps Flash or a video segment of a Prezi or Google Presentation)
(2 minutes) Content is King...
Sequence #1: Equivalency Theory (30 seconds)
Overview: This section will focus on the goal inherent in Simonson's Equivalency Theory, that online courses must be equal yet different than traditional courses.
Method: Simple Title Screen and Text.
Sequence #2: Bloom's Taxonomy & Relevance to Online Learning (30 seconds)
Overview: This section will present the challenge facing online courses. Online learning must drive us higher on Bloom's Taxonomy. Quizzing facts in an online environment, for example, is ineffective due to the fact that anyone can just look up the answers.
Method: Student Interview, simple graphics.
Sequence #3: Project-Based Learning & Challenge-Based Learning (1 minute)
Overview: This section will argue that project-based learning is an effective way to push students higher on Bloom's Taxonomy, and is an effective tool for online learning.
Method: Teacher Interview, Edutopia clip showing students engaged in project-based learning. Voiceover. Simple graphics.
(2 minutes) ...but Design is Key
Sequence #1: Design is Key Introduction (30 seconds)
Overview: This section will introduce the importance of design in online courses. It will present research showing its importance (research to still be done).
Method: Simple Title Screen and Text, Examples from Courses.
Sequence #2: Failures of Design Case Study (30 seconds)
Overview: This section will show how poor design impacts students learning by highlighting a case study of an ineffectively designed course.
Method: Online course screen capture video showing an example of a failure of design.
Sequence #3: Fundamentals of Instructional Design (1 minute)
Overview: This section will outline several elements of instructional design that can improve the quality of online courses. It will take about incorporating discussions, graphics, and a design framework to enhance student learning (research forthcoming).
Method: Simple Title Screen and Text, Examples from Courses.
(30 seconds) Conclusion
Sequence #1: Design is Key Introduction (1 minute)
Overview: This section will review the points made in the concepts and design section, pose questions surrounding what is left to learn regarding the creation of engaging online content.
Method: Not sure yet, perhaps a collage of happy student photos? Or a collage of technology-related photos focusing the viewer on the continuing rise in technology.
References
Christiansen, C., Johnson, C.W., & Horn, M. (2008). Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Simonson, M. (n.d.). Distance education: Higher education, K12, and the corporate world [vodcast]. Laureate Education. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4692780&Survey=1&47=6562140&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)