(From EDD 7007 Discussion #2)
As an instructor for teaching effectiveness, and a part of a learning-solutions team, a component of my position is to test usability of many distance education technologies within my institution’s environment.
As an instructor for teaching effectiveness, and a part of a learning-solutions team, a component of my position is to test usability of many distance education technologies within my institution’s environment.
As a result of my position, I find that I am quite comfortable with teaching and learning a multitude of technologies, from Web 2.0 to the creation of the institution’s Learning Management System. I have found in my teaching, that I am at most ease, and my faculty are most eager, when we use technologies that assist in a community of learning. This would include creating wikis, Weebly sites, and also using Coursesites to mimic some of the institute’s university partners (some of our partners use BlackBoard, Desire to Learn, Angel, Moodle, etc. while my institute created our own LMS). I feel that many new instructors find technology less daunting when they are in a collective of like-minded learning adults. Likewise, it has been my experience that many instructors come to teaching with the expectation that they will have to master the sea of technology before they even take a dip in the wading pool. Therefore, when technology pieces such as Prezi, Adobe, VideoScribe, Articulate, Storyline, Camtasia etc. get tossed around in their onboarding orientations, I’m quick to demonstrate the power potential of long-used applications such as PowerPoint, Publisher, Weebly, etc. I feel the relief as professors come to recognize that they have a foundation to work with, and the excitement of when they see what they can learn. As the Simonson text (2015) recommended, my team is very consciously determining the lowest common technology, and identifying learning experiences based on determining the learning outcomes, which is teaching in an online environment effectively (p.117).
Given that our team works with instructors to provide instructional technology, teaching effectiveness strategies, and online education to instructors and staff, we base technology adaptation from assessment of technology competency. My department is uniquely positioned in that students are actually faculty, and tend to have at least some level of technological competency. What is more, faculty, staff and students come very specifically to our institute for technology training needs. This is an advantage over a subject specific professor or student who does not recognize a training need, but rather views technology adaptation as a means to an end. As an example, a biology instructor or student might require the use of a wiki as part of a collective community tracking the migration route of a species. In this example, neither the instructor nor student would be focused on the wiki itself more than the community tracking of migration patterns. Typically, when a student approaches my institute, it is either by choice or recommendation to understand a technology tool just for the sake for the tool itself. That said, technology training is intentionally learner-centered, and elicits student discovery and construction of knowledge through cooperative, collaborative, supportive, and individualistic learning environments (Simonson, Smaldino, & Zvacek, 2015).
Given a rich history of computer use and video gaming, students within the institute increasingly seek social and competitive learning environments. From this, courses are developed and/or redeployed with learning that has a social and competitive gaming components. Based on assessment, students do not wish to participate on Facebook with classmates, but expect to have a social community that is singularly dedicated to the course. We have not yet brought in any virtual worlds such as second life, but have indeed created communities of learning.
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., & Zvacek, S. (2015). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (6th ed.). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Given that our team works with instructors to provide instructional technology, teaching effectiveness strategies, and online education to instructors and staff, we base technology adaptation from assessment of technology competency. My department is uniquely positioned in that students are actually faculty, and tend to have at least some level of technological competency. What is more, faculty, staff and students come very specifically to our institute for technology training needs. This is an advantage over a subject specific professor or student who does not recognize a training need, but rather views technology adaptation as a means to an end. As an example, a biology instructor or student might require the use of a wiki as part of a collective community tracking the migration route of a species. In this example, neither the instructor nor student would be focused on the wiki itself more than the community tracking of migration patterns. Typically, when a student approaches my institute, it is either by choice or recommendation to understand a technology tool just for the sake for the tool itself. That said, technology training is intentionally learner-centered, and elicits student discovery and construction of knowledge through cooperative, collaborative, supportive, and individualistic learning environments (Simonson, Smaldino, & Zvacek, 2015).
Given a rich history of computer use and video gaming, students within the institute increasingly seek social and competitive learning environments. From this, courses are developed and/or redeployed with learning that has a social and competitive gaming components. Based on assessment, students do not wish to participate on Facebook with classmates, but expect to have a social community that is singularly dedicated to the course. We have not yet brought in any virtual worlds such as second life, but have indeed created communities of learning.
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., & Zvacek, S. (2015). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (6th ed.). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.