Currently, our school is a selected school for the Race to the Top initiative set up by the Obama administration. Through this funding there are many requirements, many meetings, and much paperwork to complete. The scope of this project is quite large. During this process, our state is changing to the national common core standards. This process started last year with a Race to the Top team at our school. Then, I was brought on board as part of the sub-team this year. My role in the process is to evaluate the English standards throughout the district. Then, we just brought all teachers on board for curriculum alignment to the old and new standards. After the curriculum alignment is complete, we will begin to implement the new standards. The state initially set the scope and timeline for this project. However, the state did not have all of the information for the project when the timeline and scope was set. Therefore, all of the deadlines throughout the project have been subject to change. In fact, the original completion time for the project was 2014. Now, the state is saying that we should start implementing the new standards K-8 right now. This case is a perfect example of scope creep.
Scope creep is the uncontrolled changes to a project (Lynch, & Roecker, 2007). These changes come in various forms. For instance, the project may receive extra funding and, therefore, may need more attention given to it. On the other hand, the project may change because the stakeholders change their minds about what they desire (Lynch, & Roecker, 2007). In the case of our Race to the Top Initiative, there are several factors affecting the success of this project. The scope creep here is that the stakeholders (the state) didn’t realize the complete process of the project and had their timeline off. Since the original timeline is off, the teams can’t get to project completion successfully and with quality work. Since the state at first said there was plenty of time, our school district planned our work accordingly. Now, the state is saying implement now. Therefore, the team members here have to rush through the process. Rushing in this manner can cause mistakes and inconsistencies that will can cause problems in the end.
Since I am not in the managing role in this case, I can see what the poor planning has done. Now, I am not trying to accuse the state. They may be dealing with a faulty timeline from the federal government. I also want to try to stay away from any political talk here. However, I do believe that this is the problem in many grant funded school initiatives. As soon as it sounds like a good idea, someone jumps on it to get the project moving. Then, it starts to become a “we’ll figure it out as we go” project. As we know from our project management class, any good project cannot be managed in this manner. The project managers need to take plenty of time to analyze the situation, address all concerns, prepare a feasible timeline, and then prepare to design, implement and assess (Portny, et. al, 2008). Therefore, if I was project manager, I would wait until I knew exactly with what we were dealing. Then, I would start to plan for implementation.
Lynch, M. M., & Roecker, J. (2007). Project managing e-learning: A handbook for successful design, delivery, and management. London: Routledge. Copyright by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. Reprinted by permission of Taylor & Francis Group, LLC via the Copyright Clearance Center.
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Communication
According to Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer (2008), communicating effectively during a project is one of the most important parts of being a project manager. If communication is not open and poignant between team members and stakeholders, then a project can really fall apart. However, communication comes in so many forms that it can be hard to decide which will be the most effective. According to Dr. Stolovitch (n.d.), what people say is not as important as how they say it. He means that, when communicating, tone and demeanor can add or detract from your intended meaning. For this project, I look at and listened to the same message delivered in three different venues: email, voicemail, and face-to-face. While I understand the point of the activity, I did not really see any distinct differences between these three scenarios. I am sure that the activity wants me to say one was more effective in deliver or tone. However, the message sounded nearly the same to me in all three venues. I found all the them to be professional and even-toned. In each one, the person seemed calm and as if she is a team player. While staying calm and kind is effective, none of the scenarios seemed as urgent as the message information seemed. The speaker should have a little more urgency in her voice, and perhaps, she needs to set a timeline for the other person to get that information to her. By setting a deadline, the project manager is remaining in control of the project progression. As far as the most effective venue, each one has the some value.
The voicemail and face-to-face have an interesting element of the tone of voice that can help them. The tone of your voice can send a message (Stolovitch, n.d.). In the voicemail, the project manager can encourage the team members and/or be urgent with deadlines through his/her voice. The face-to-face scenario adds another element: the visual. In the face-to-face venue, the project manager can emphasize points through vocal and visual means. Also, in a face-to-face scenario, the project manager can get a confirmation right then instead of waiting for a return call or email, so there are advantages. However, in both these scenarios, the project manager should get the conversation in writing. This is where email would be effective. Email may not get the project manager a quick response, but it will get the discourse in writing. Having a written copy is vital to the project management process.
Therefore, even though I didn’t see much difference in the way the message was delivered, I do believe that project managers need to think about how they communicate. The project manager needs to think about which venue will get the answer needed in the quickest and most effective way. Then, the PM needs to think about getting a written record of the discourse.
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Stolovitch (n.d.). Communicating with Stakeholders [video]. Retrieved from: http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=6290461&Survey=1&47=8115912&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
The voicemail and face-to-face have an interesting element of the tone of voice that can help them. The tone of your voice can send a message (Stolovitch, n.d.). In the voicemail, the project manager can encourage the team members and/or be urgent with deadlines through his/her voice. The face-to-face scenario adds another element: the visual. In the face-to-face venue, the project manager can emphasize points through vocal and visual means. Also, in a face-to-face scenario, the project manager can get a confirmation right then instead of waiting for a return call or email, so there are advantages. However, in both these scenarios, the project manager should get the conversation in writing. This is where email would be effective. Email may not get the project manager a quick response, but it will get the discourse in writing. Having a written copy is vital to the project management process.
Therefore, even though I didn’t see much difference in the way the message was delivered, I do believe that project managers need to think about how they communicate. The project manager needs to think about which venue will get the answer needed in the quickest and most effective way. Then, the PM needs to think about getting a written record of the discourse.
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Stolovitch (n.d.). Communicating with Stakeholders [video]. Retrieved from: http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=6290461&Survey=1&47=8115912&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
Friday, January 13, 2012
Project Post Morteum
My husband and I recently decided to refinance our house. With home values not at their optimal state, we knew that our home value had fallen some since we purchased it. However, we didn’t know how much, and we wanted to make sure that we got the highest appraisal value possible, so we decided to do home improvements. I was raised in a home of do-it-yourselfers, but my husband was not. Therefore, I decided to be the project manager for these projects. My husband was my team member, and I brought on my dad as the SME since his has built two of the house they have lived in. The first project was replacing the bathroom floor.
The previous owners of the house did not put in the bathroom flooring correctly, and as a result, the flooring was starting to peel backwards. My 1 year-old boy and 4 year-old girl had started throwing water out of the bath tub, and the floor boards were rotting. So, we needed to replace all of it. So, I consulted my SME, who told me that we needed to pull up all of it, put down new subfloor, and put down new tile. I consulted my resources and my team member (my husband) before I purchased anything. By including my husband in the decision making, it made the process take longer. My husband and I have very different opinions on home décor. After everything was purchased and ready, we decided my husband would strip the bathroom, and my SME (my dad) and I would fix the flooring. So, my husband grabbed a hammer and started ripping up the floor.
At first, it was easy because there were areas that were already ruined enough to just pull up. Then, it got difficult. It was taking a long time to get very little done. My husband thought he needed a different tool; he thought he needed a tile gun that would heat the tile enough to pull it up. So, I borrowed one; this was not the solution. The tile gun was just a glorified hair dryer. The tensions were starting to rise. Then, I decided to go to the hardware store and see what they suggested. After consulting the hardware store, I came home with a destruction bar to help, and it did help. The floor was torn up in no time. Then, my dad and I swooped in to get the new floor down. While this process took a while, it went smoothly.
So, what went wrong in the first part? Some project management steps were missing in the early stages that could have made this project go more smoothly. First, while I had a conversation with my SME (my dad) and with my team member (my husband), I should have had all of us meet together at the same time. This communication model would have helped all of us be on the same page, and it would have helped my husband clarify how to best perform his role (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer, 2008). Also, as a project manager, I needed to give my team member the proper tool for success (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer, 2008). Since my team member was not naturally good at home improvement, I needed to spend extra time planning his needs. Also, the project would have moved more quickly if I hadn’t included my team member in the decision-making. Unfortunately, that was not a choice in this situation.
Overall, the project ended up being a successful. However, it would have went more smoothly by have a better communication plan and better tools for my husband.
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project
management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
The previous owners of the house did not put in the bathroom flooring correctly, and as a result, the flooring was starting to peel backwards. My 1 year-old boy and 4 year-old girl had started throwing water out of the bath tub, and the floor boards were rotting. So, we needed to replace all of it. So, I consulted my SME, who told me that we needed to pull up all of it, put down new subfloor, and put down new tile. I consulted my resources and my team member (my husband) before I purchased anything. By including my husband in the decision making, it made the process take longer. My husband and I have very different opinions on home décor. After everything was purchased and ready, we decided my husband would strip the bathroom, and my SME (my dad) and I would fix the flooring. So, my husband grabbed a hammer and started ripping up the floor.
At first, it was easy because there were areas that were already ruined enough to just pull up. Then, it got difficult. It was taking a long time to get very little done. My husband thought he needed a different tool; he thought he needed a tile gun that would heat the tile enough to pull it up. So, I borrowed one; this was not the solution. The tile gun was just a glorified hair dryer. The tensions were starting to rise. Then, I decided to go to the hardware store and see what they suggested. After consulting the hardware store, I came home with a destruction bar to help, and it did help. The floor was torn up in no time. Then, my dad and I swooped in to get the new floor down. While this process took a while, it went smoothly.
So, what went wrong in the first part? Some project management steps were missing in the early stages that could have made this project go more smoothly. First, while I had a conversation with my SME (my dad) and with my team member (my husband), I should have had all of us meet together at the same time. This communication model would have helped all of us be on the same page, and it would have helped my husband clarify how to best perform his role (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer, 2008). Also, as a project manager, I needed to give my team member the proper tool for success (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer, 2008). Since my team member was not naturally good at home improvement, I needed to spend extra time planning his needs. Also, the project would have moved more quickly if I hadn’t included my team member in the decision-making. Unfortunately, that was not a choice in this situation.
Overall, the project ended up being a successful. However, it would have went more smoothly by have a better communication plan and better tools for my husband.
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project
management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Friday, December 23, 2011
Instructional Design: My Future
While asynchronous online learning is relatively new, distance education has a long history. The first reference to distance education was correspondence courses (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). In these correspondence courses, learners were sent information and assessments. Then, after the work was completed the information was sent back for evaluation. While these courses still exist today, the more popular distance education is online learning. In the same way that this progression has happened, new distance education technologies will emerge in the future. With each new introduction, the perception of distance education will change. The job of instructional designers will be to make sure that perception continually changes for the better.
Currently, the perception of distance education is mixed. Those who learned in a traditional learning environment may be hesitant to join a distance learning class. These learners may be concerned that the education will not be equivalent to a traditional classroom. These concerns center on the idea that education becomes accessible for all, which makes some concerned that the quality of education will decrease (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). If the instructional design of a course is good, the learners do not need to worry about the education not being equal. In fact, especially in the American culture, instructional designers try to use the equivalency theory, which says students can get an equal education to those in a traditional classroom. Another felt concern is that those who have been out of school for a long time may be worried about the workload or the technology (Moller, Foshay, & Huett, 2008). Again, these learners do not need to be concerned. As long as they have access to the technology, an excellently designed class will help those students become familiar with the technology. Any concern that can be uncovered, the solution can be found in a well-designed program.
Some people realize the benefits of distance education, and some see the idea of distance education is a prosperous one. Distance education allows anyone to learn at anytime and anywhere, which will allow them to continue their education while continue their career (Moller, Foshay, & Huett, 2009). Also, companies find distance education to be financially prosperous because they don’t have to pay for travel to meeting or education seminars (Moller, Foshay, & Huett, 2009). The students who realize that they can truly do it all with distance education can prosper. Of course, those students need to make sure that distance education is for them. Students wanting to take a distance course need to make sure that they have the time management skills, motivation, and technology to do it (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009; Beldarrain, 2006). If the student, or for that fact a company, feels that they fulfill those requirements, they will enjoy the financial and time flexible of distance education.
Instructional designers have the audacious task of promoting distance education. In order to win over skeptics, instructional designers need to do one thing: create meaningful and well-developed courses (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). In my own personal discussions, I have found that people are turned off to distance education because they have experienced it and did not like it or because they are from traditional educational learning environments and do not think that distance education is valid. As instructional designers, we are capable of handling the first complaint fully. We can make sure that no matter the financial constraints given to us we create activities that are engaging. The internet has so many free tools and videos for instructional designers to grab and utilize. Therefore, by going through the proper design steps of analyzing our learners, analyzing our objectives, gathering learning objects including media, and delivering the instruction, we can encourage online learning. The second complaint is harder to handle. However, as distance education gains popularity, skeptics are going to be forced into some kind of distance learning arena. Once they are in that distance learning, we need to make sure our instruction delivers the persuasion they need.
I have been and will continue be a powerful advocate for distance education. I teach in a traditional public high school. Our state has adopted flexible credits, which enables students to gain more education through online learning. The teachers at my school are outraged that a student would be allowed to learn online. I have to admit that I didn’t like the idea at first either because it wasn’t equal to my classroom. However, I have seen through the equivalency theory that the learning can be equivalent to my classroom (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). It will not ever be the same as my classroom, but it is not supposed to be. As I shared this theory with other teachers, I see a few of them start to consider the validity of online schooling. I feel that I have an advantage as I go forward. I work with people who are hesitant to the online movement, so I get to see what will and will not change their opinion. I can share theories with them and ideas to see if I can break down their hesitation. On top of trying to persuade people about the importance of the online environment, I will also be a dynamic instructional designer through my willingness to truly reach the student. As I become more and more familiar with different technologies and tools, I will strive to delivery truly effective and meaningful distance instruction. All of this together will help me to be an advocate within the instructional design community.
References
Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student
interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2),139–153.
Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008). The evolution of distance education: Implications for
instructional design on the potential of the web (Part 1: Training and development).
TechTrends, 52(3), 70–75.
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a
distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.
Currently, the perception of distance education is mixed. Those who learned in a traditional learning environment may be hesitant to join a distance learning class. These learners may be concerned that the education will not be equivalent to a traditional classroom. These concerns center on the idea that education becomes accessible for all, which makes some concerned that the quality of education will decrease (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). If the instructional design of a course is good, the learners do not need to worry about the education not being equal. In fact, especially in the American culture, instructional designers try to use the equivalency theory, which says students can get an equal education to those in a traditional classroom. Another felt concern is that those who have been out of school for a long time may be worried about the workload or the technology (Moller, Foshay, & Huett, 2008). Again, these learners do not need to be concerned. As long as they have access to the technology, an excellently designed class will help those students become familiar with the technology. Any concern that can be uncovered, the solution can be found in a well-designed program.
Some people realize the benefits of distance education, and some see the idea of distance education is a prosperous one. Distance education allows anyone to learn at anytime and anywhere, which will allow them to continue their education while continue their career (Moller, Foshay, & Huett, 2009). Also, companies find distance education to be financially prosperous because they don’t have to pay for travel to meeting or education seminars (Moller, Foshay, & Huett, 2009). The students who realize that they can truly do it all with distance education can prosper. Of course, those students need to make sure that distance education is for them. Students wanting to take a distance course need to make sure that they have the time management skills, motivation, and technology to do it (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009; Beldarrain, 2006). If the student, or for that fact a company, feels that they fulfill those requirements, they will enjoy the financial and time flexible of distance education.
Instructional designers have the audacious task of promoting distance education. In order to win over skeptics, instructional designers need to do one thing: create meaningful and well-developed courses (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). In my own personal discussions, I have found that people are turned off to distance education because they have experienced it and did not like it or because they are from traditional educational learning environments and do not think that distance education is valid. As instructional designers, we are capable of handling the first complaint fully. We can make sure that no matter the financial constraints given to us we create activities that are engaging. The internet has so many free tools and videos for instructional designers to grab and utilize. Therefore, by going through the proper design steps of analyzing our learners, analyzing our objectives, gathering learning objects including media, and delivering the instruction, we can encourage online learning. The second complaint is harder to handle. However, as distance education gains popularity, skeptics are going to be forced into some kind of distance learning arena. Once they are in that distance learning, we need to make sure our instruction delivers the persuasion they need.
I have been and will continue be a powerful advocate for distance education. I teach in a traditional public high school. Our state has adopted flexible credits, which enables students to gain more education through online learning. The teachers at my school are outraged that a student would be allowed to learn online. I have to admit that I didn’t like the idea at first either because it wasn’t equal to my classroom. However, I have seen through the equivalency theory that the learning can be equivalent to my classroom (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). It will not ever be the same as my classroom, but it is not supposed to be. As I shared this theory with other teachers, I see a few of them start to consider the validity of online schooling. I feel that I have an advantage as I go forward. I work with people who are hesitant to the online movement, so I get to see what will and will not change their opinion. I can share theories with them and ideas to see if I can break down their hesitation. On top of trying to persuade people about the importance of the online environment, I will also be a dynamic instructional designer through my willingness to truly reach the student. As I become more and more familiar with different technologies and tools, I will strive to delivery truly effective and meaningful distance instruction. All of this together will help me to be an advocate within the instructional design community.
References
Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student
interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2),139–153.
Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008). The evolution of distance education: Implications for
instructional design on the potential of the web (Part 1: Training and development).
TechTrends, 52(3), 70–75.
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a
distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Face-to-Face to a Blended Learning Environment
If discussions in your face-to-face learning environment are not producing the level of communication desired, it is a good idea to think about how to best reach these learners and adjust the learning environment. A blended learning environment will allow for more thoughtful discussions and should yield the level of communication that is desired. Before jumping into this change there are some considerations. If you follow the steps below, you will be able to successfully implement your blended classroom.
Pre-planning
Before deciding whether a blended course is right for your training program, you should
1. Analyze your learner:
Why are the discussions so bad in the first place? Are the learners introverted?
Are the learners not applying themselves?
The answers to these questions can determine if an online environment will help. If your students are introverted, they will probably do much better within a discussion forum than in a face-to-face setting (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). On the other hand, if the learners lack motivation, an online environment may not help. Students who succeed best in distance education are those who are intrinsically motivated (Moller, Foshay, & Huett, 2008). You may need to spend time analyzing the general abilities of these students (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009).
2. Consider the Essential Content
What needs to be put in the online learning portion to get the results you need?
After you have considered the learners, consider what they are already good at accomplishing in the classroom. Then, consider what needs to be moved to an online environment. In order for the online component to be successful, you must consider what content is essential in this type of learning (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). Also, even if something is currently working in the classroom, consider if a Web 2.0 tool could make it better. In fact, Web 2.0 tools can increase the intrinsic cognitive load of the learner (Lambert, Kalyuga, & Capan, 2009). While too much cognitive load is not good, increasing the cognitive load for your students may be one way to increase classroom participation. Some Web 2.0 tools you can consider are blogs, wiki, and podcasting. See if these delivery platforms can help increase the communication.
3. Learning Environment
What Web 2.0 tool will allow me to increase class communication?
When planning for a blended environment, you need to consider what platform you will use for content delivery (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). You need to consider what level of technology to which your learners will have access. You can only consider technologies that, with a little orientation, your students will actually be able to use (Beldrrain, 2006). You may want to consider a blog, wiki, or discussion forum, which all allow for asynchronous communication. Asynchronous communication means that they will be working individually and not necessarily at the same time (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). It sounds like you want your students to working asynchronously to reach the communication goals you have for this course.
4. Assessment
How will you make sure this is working?
Finally, consider how you will evaluate the effectiveness of this transition (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). With the change from a face-to-face classroom to a blended classroom, you will need to have assessments in place to make sure the change is achieving your goal. Will you use surveys, observations, interviews?
Enhancing the Current Course
With these considerations in mind, you can create a class that adds to your current course. The elements of discussion and collaboration will increase in a blended environment. Discussion posts ask the students to actually read all of the material and then synthesize it in terms of a prompt. This interaction with the material leads to deeper analysis of the information (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). Since the students currently do not seem to be prepared for in-class discussions, a discussion forum will increase the communication to reach your intended goal. Next, if your students are not collaborating well, then a blog or wiki could allow more collaboration. These mediums make the students interact by adding information to each other’s thoughts and information. Students can also work on group projects.
Role Change
Another consideration in your online environment is the change in your role. In the online environment, you are only a facilitator, not lecturer (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). You will need to communicate thoroughly all expectations, grading policies, and any other information in advance. Then, you will need to create learning opportunities and encourage students through open communication. Then, the students will need to take their learning in their control. Since you are so used to be the “teacher” in the face-to-face classroom, you will need to evaluate your new role as facilitator. In this role, you will be asked to lead the students to the right outcomes through helpful comments. It is not your job to be punitive as a facilitator; rather, you need to be an encourager. While it will be your job to evaluate their work, you will be in the discussion with them, guiding them to accurate and deeper conclusions. In fact, you should plan to post within their discussions, especially in the beginning of the course for learning guidance (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009).
Being Encouraging
During these discussions, facilitators can encourage students in many ways. First, facilitators encourage students be being incredibly clear in expectations within the discussion forum and expectations for grading (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). Then, facilitators can encourage students by pointing out what the students are doing well within the discussion as the discussion is occurring. In other words, facilitators encourage by gently guiding students as they are learning, not just afterwards (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). Finally, facilitators can be encouraging by using very specific rubrics and giving really specific feedback during grading (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009).
In order to make sure your new discussion forum is effective, you not only need to consider the suggestions given above for your role as an encourager, you also need to consider the implementation process. In order for this to be successful, you need to be an encourager during the transition time. First, you need to offer open communication during the change so that students know they can handle the change. You need to create a community of cooperation. During this change, the students are going to need to know if they are doing things “right,” so you need to give quick feedback (Beldarrain, 2006).
If you follow these steps, you will be able to successfully implement a blended class and will, hopefully, see the increased level of communication desired. Good luck!
References
Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student
interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2), 139–153.
Lambert, J., Kalyuga, S., & Capan, L. (2009). Student perceptions and cognitive load: What can
they tell us about e-learning Web 2.0 course design? E-learning and Digital Media, 6(2),
150–163. Retrieved from
http://www.wwwords.co.uk/rss/abstract.asp?j=elea&aid=3568&doi=1
Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008). The evolution of distance education: Implications for
instructional design on the potential of the web (Part 2: Higher education). TechTrends,
52(4), 66–70.
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a
distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.
Pre-planning
Before deciding whether a blended course is right for your training program, you should
1. Analyze your learner:
Why are the discussions so bad in the first place? Are the learners introverted?
Are the learners not applying themselves?
The answers to these questions can determine if an online environment will help. If your students are introverted, they will probably do much better within a discussion forum than in a face-to-face setting (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). On the other hand, if the learners lack motivation, an online environment may not help. Students who succeed best in distance education are those who are intrinsically motivated (Moller, Foshay, & Huett, 2008). You may need to spend time analyzing the general abilities of these students (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009).
2. Consider the Essential Content
What needs to be put in the online learning portion to get the results you need?
After you have considered the learners, consider what they are already good at accomplishing in the classroom. Then, consider what needs to be moved to an online environment. In order for the online component to be successful, you must consider what content is essential in this type of learning (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). Also, even if something is currently working in the classroom, consider if a Web 2.0 tool could make it better. In fact, Web 2.0 tools can increase the intrinsic cognitive load of the learner (Lambert, Kalyuga, & Capan, 2009). While too much cognitive load is not good, increasing the cognitive load for your students may be one way to increase classroom participation. Some Web 2.0 tools you can consider are blogs, wiki, and podcasting. See if these delivery platforms can help increase the communication.
3. Learning Environment
What Web 2.0 tool will allow me to increase class communication?
When planning for a blended environment, you need to consider what platform you will use for content delivery (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). You need to consider what level of technology to which your learners will have access. You can only consider technologies that, with a little orientation, your students will actually be able to use (Beldrrain, 2006). You may want to consider a blog, wiki, or discussion forum, which all allow for asynchronous communication. Asynchronous communication means that they will be working individually and not necessarily at the same time (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). It sounds like you want your students to working asynchronously to reach the communication goals you have for this course.
4. Assessment
How will you make sure this is working?
Finally, consider how you will evaluate the effectiveness of this transition (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). With the change from a face-to-face classroom to a blended classroom, you will need to have assessments in place to make sure the change is achieving your goal. Will you use surveys, observations, interviews?
Enhancing the Current Course
With these considerations in mind, you can create a class that adds to your current course. The elements of discussion and collaboration will increase in a blended environment. Discussion posts ask the students to actually read all of the material and then synthesize it in terms of a prompt. This interaction with the material leads to deeper analysis of the information (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). Since the students currently do not seem to be prepared for in-class discussions, a discussion forum will increase the communication to reach your intended goal. Next, if your students are not collaborating well, then a blog or wiki could allow more collaboration. These mediums make the students interact by adding information to each other’s thoughts and information. Students can also work on group projects.
Role Change
Another consideration in your online environment is the change in your role. In the online environment, you are only a facilitator, not lecturer (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). You will need to communicate thoroughly all expectations, grading policies, and any other information in advance. Then, you will need to create learning opportunities and encourage students through open communication. Then, the students will need to take their learning in their control. Since you are so used to be the “teacher” in the face-to-face classroom, you will need to evaluate your new role as facilitator. In this role, you will be asked to lead the students to the right outcomes through helpful comments. It is not your job to be punitive as a facilitator; rather, you need to be an encourager. While it will be your job to evaluate their work, you will be in the discussion with them, guiding them to accurate and deeper conclusions. In fact, you should plan to post within their discussions, especially in the beginning of the course for learning guidance (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009).
Being Encouraging
During these discussions, facilitators can encourage students in many ways. First, facilitators encourage students be being incredibly clear in expectations within the discussion forum and expectations for grading (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). Then, facilitators can encourage students by pointing out what the students are doing well within the discussion as the discussion is occurring. In other words, facilitators encourage by gently guiding students as they are learning, not just afterwards (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). Finally, facilitators can be encouraging by using very specific rubrics and giving really specific feedback during grading (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009).
In order to make sure your new discussion forum is effective, you not only need to consider the suggestions given above for your role as an encourager, you also need to consider the implementation process. In order for this to be successful, you need to be an encourager during the transition time. First, you need to offer open communication during the change so that students know they can handle the change. You need to create a community of cooperation. During this change, the students are going to need to know if they are doing things “right,” so you need to give quick feedback (Beldarrain, 2006).
If you follow these steps, you will be able to successfully implement a blended class and will, hopefully, see the increased level of communication desired. Good luck!
References
Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student
interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2), 139–153.
Lambert, J., Kalyuga, S., & Capan, L. (2009). Student perceptions and cognitive load: What can
they tell us about e-learning Web 2.0 course design? E-learning and Digital Media, 6(2),
150–163. Retrieved from
http://www.wwwords.co.uk/rss/abstract.asp?j=elea&aid=3568&doi=1
Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008). The evolution of distance education: Implications for
instructional design on the potential of the web (Part 2: Higher education). TechTrends,
52(4), 66–70.
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a
distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Open Course Pros and Cons
Evaluation of an Open Course Site
http://oyc.yale.edu/english/introduction-to-theory-of-literature
Open Course websites are course offerings available online entirely free for anyone with internet access to take (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). These courses allow any person, anywhere with technology access to expand his/her mind without the financial cost. These Open Course sites truly are distance education at its purest form. Distance education is supposed to allow education to spread (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). With free classes, education can disperse at rapid speeds. While these classes are a good way to gain extra knowledge and are somewhat effective, there are drawbacks to the design of these classes. Unfortunately, while the concept of these classes is great, there are some downfalls. First of all, the general public is probably not aware of these open classes since I was unaware of them until now. So, for these classes to truly reach the public, they need to be better publicized. Secondly, students who take these classes need to be completely intrinsically motivated since there is no college credit or financial incentive to take them (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). When looking at the design of these Open Course classes, there are some considerations the designer needs to think through: Does the distance learning environment seem pre-planned? Does the online course seem to fit the suggested design for distance learning? Does the designer implement course activities that maximize the active learning for students? In order to answer these questions, I will use a Literature Open Course from Yale.
The course I selected is an online Literary Theory course taught by a Yale professor. The course is applicable to my Honors 12 classroom because I teach Literary Theory to my Honors 12 students, and the lenses the professor is teaching is Deconstruction, which is one on my hardest lenses to teach because students do not often understand the concept. I was drawn to this class for that reason; if the classroom at Yale is good, then I would use it in my classroom at school. The platform for delivery is fine for this Open Course. The website it clean, neat, and easily maneuvered. Yale offers almost any subject matter a student could be interested in, and it is all easily accessible. Once I was in the actual classroom, I found text readings that I would need to borrow from a library if I wanted to access them. Having the course reading available probably supplements the in-class learning that the students are doing. This is effective for them since it could aid in their understanding. However, for someone entering the site who is not part of the class, it could be a hindrance to the learning since the text is not readily available. Since most students do not learn just through reading alone, this might not be the most effective delivery method for the 21st century learner (Seckel, 2007). To help that type of learner, the site tries to give technology options. The site offers the audio and video of the actual lecture. This is helpful for those who learn better through auditory and visual means. However, the lecture was lost on me, and I teach deconstruction in my classroom. The information referred quite heavily to the course text and required the learner to follow along with complex concepts. The lecture video does not aid in the learning either since it is just the professor moving back and forth while he lectures. Also, the site does not add any other activities such as practice or quizzes to see if the learner understands.
With all of these elements in mind, it seems that Yale pre-planned this instruction; however, it is not designed to keep the learner engaged. Learners can see that Yale pre-planned the website because the site is neat and organized. The Yale pre-planning most likely centered around how to get this information out as reinforcement to the class, and then they decided to make it an open course. Therefore, this course probably did not consider the needs of the general learner, only the needs of those enrolled in the class (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). With this lack of consideration and the general remedial feel of the site, Yale did not probably think past reinforcement for its objective. With all of the emerging technology that could be used such as podcasts, discussion boards, and interactive videos or quizzes, the Open Course lacks its full potential for delivery (Beldarrain, 2006). However, the lack of interactivity is most likely due to lack of funding (Beldarrain, 2006). Why would an institution, especially as prestigious as Yale, spend time and money on terrifically and expensively designed free courses? The basic Open Course site that Yale offers is sufficient for an intrinsically motivated learner who is willing to look for extra information and learn on his/her own. The Yale Open Course is also good for reinforcing the face-to-face classwork. However, as a stand-alone learning environment, it is difficult to say that this is a well-delivered design.
Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student
interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2), 139–153.
Seckel, S. (2007). Characteristics and responsibilities of successful e-learners. Journal of
INSTRUCTION DELIVERY SYSTEMS, 21(2), 22-26.
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a
distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.
http://oyc.yale.edu/english/introduction-to-theory-of-literature
Open Course websites are course offerings available online entirely free for anyone with internet access to take (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). These courses allow any person, anywhere with technology access to expand his/her mind without the financial cost. These Open Course sites truly are distance education at its purest form. Distance education is supposed to allow education to spread (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). With free classes, education can disperse at rapid speeds. While these classes are a good way to gain extra knowledge and are somewhat effective, there are drawbacks to the design of these classes. Unfortunately, while the concept of these classes is great, there are some downfalls. First of all, the general public is probably not aware of these open classes since I was unaware of them until now. So, for these classes to truly reach the public, they need to be better publicized. Secondly, students who take these classes need to be completely intrinsically motivated since there is no college credit or financial incentive to take them (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). When looking at the design of these Open Course classes, there are some considerations the designer needs to think through: Does the distance learning environment seem pre-planned? Does the online course seem to fit the suggested design for distance learning? Does the designer implement course activities that maximize the active learning for students? In order to answer these questions, I will use a Literature Open Course from Yale.
The course I selected is an online Literary Theory course taught by a Yale professor. The course is applicable to my Honors 12 classroom because I teach Literary Theory to my Honors 12 students, and the lenses the professor is teaching is Deconstruction, which is one on my hardest lenses to teach because students do not often understand the concept. I was drawn to this class for that reason; if the classroom at Yale is good, then I would use it in my classroom at school. The platform for delivery is fine for this Open Course. The website it clean, neat, and easily maneuvered. Yale offers almost any subject matter a student could be interested in, and it is all easily accessible. Once I was in the actual classroom, I found text readings that I would need to borrow from a library if I wanted to access them. Having the course reading available probably supplements the in-class learning that the students are doing. This is effective for them since it could aid in their understanding. However, for someone entering the site who is not part of the class, it could be a hindrance to the learning since the text is not readily available. Since most students do not learn just through reading alone, this might not be the most effective delivery method for the 21st century learner (Seckel, 2007). To help that type of learner, the site tries to give technology options. The site offers the audio and video of the actual lecture. This is helpful for those who learn better through auditory and visual means. However, the lecture was lost on me, and I teach deconstruction in my classroom. The information referred quite heavily to the course text and required the learner to follow along with complex concepts. The lecture video does not aid in the learning either since it is just the professor moving back and forth while he lectures. Also, the site does not add any other activities such as practice or quizzes to see if the learner understands.
With all of these elements in mind, it seems that Yale pre-planned this instruction; however, it is not designed to keep the learner engaged. Learners can see that Yale pre-planned the website because the site is neat and organized. The Yale pre-planning most likely centered around how to get this information out as reinforcement to the class, and then they decided to make it an open course. Therefore, this course probably did not consider the needs of the general learner, only the needs of those enrolled in the class (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). With this lack of consideration and the general remedial feel of the site, Yale did not probably think past reinforcement for its objective. With all of the emerging technology that could be used such as podcasts, discussion boards, and interactive videos or quizzes, the Open Course lacks its full potential for delivery (Beldarrain, 2006). However, the lack of interactivity is most likely due to lack of funding (Beldarrain, 2006). Why would an institution, especially as prestigious as Yale, spend time and money on terrifically and expensively designed free courses? The basic Open Course site that Yale offers is sufficient for an intrinsically motivated learner who is willing to look for extra information and learn on his/her own. The Yale Open Course is also good for reinforcing the face-to-face classwork. However, as a stand-alone learning environment, it is difficult to say that this is a well-delivered design.
Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student
interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2), 139–153.
Seckel, S. (2007). Characteristics and responsibilities of successful e-learners. Journal of
INSTRUCTION DELIVERY SYSTEMS, 21(2), 22-26.
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a
distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Technology Tool Selection
Our company has just acquired a new automated staff information system, and I have been put in charge of the training sessions for this program. Unfortunately, not everyone can meet at the same time, so I have to organize distance learning that will meet the needs of the learner and adhere to the guidelines set up by the company. In this scenario, the company has stressed that the employees need to be able to share information through documents and screen shots and need to be able to collaborate.
Picking the best course management system (CMS) for the project takes knowledge of the company’s desires as well as the learners’ needs. Most of the students will probably have average familiarity with technology. However, I do not want to overwhelm the learner since all or most of this learning will be done asynchronously. I want to make sure that all parties leave feeling fulfilled after this training. I do not want learners to feel lonely and overwhelmed, and I do not want the providers or me to feel as if the results are not meeting the desire (Moller, Foshay, & Huett, May/June 2008). Therefore, I have to take what the company wants into consideration first. The company wants the employees to share information and collaborate. Then, I want to take the learner’s needs into consideration. The learner wants this to be quick and efficient. After consideration, I will use CourseSites to host my learning sessions. CourseSites is user-friendly on both ends of the communication spectrum, with not much technology “noise” in between (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). In this format, students can collaborate in virtual classrooms. They can also show what they know through Dropbox assignments. Finally, they can easily share documents. In the arena of CourseSites, I will be able to provide virtual learning linked to that site as well. Using something like Second Life or Active Worlds, I could create virtual tutorials of what the students would need to do in real life (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). Also, Podcasting the steps of the new system could also be beneficial to learners. CourseSites is easily customizable to fit the exact needs of the students.
Besides being user-friendly, another advantage of CourseSites is that it is free. Therefore, the company can save money on this training while still reaching its educational goals. The Podcasting can also be free depending on who does it. If I make and produce it myself, then it is essentially free. However, the idea of using Second Life and Active Worlds is where the financial burden comes in. These sites cost money to get into the good bracket of tools. If I really wanted to do virtual tours of the new information system and the company did not want to pay for the interactive sites, then I could produce my own live action tutorial and post as a video. Second Life and Active Worlds are just another way to get through to a younger audience if that is what my audience turns out to be.
CourseSites will be the perfect fit to support all of the technology tools I want to use to create the best learning environment for this situation.
Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the web (Part 1: Training and development). TechTrends, 52(3), 70–75.
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.
Picking the best course management system (CMS) for the project takes knowledge of the company’s desires as well as the learners’ needs. Most of the students will probably have average familiarity with technology. However, I do not want to overwhelm the learner since all or most of this learning will be done asynchronously. I want to make sure that all parties leave feeling fulfilled after this training. I do not want learners to feel lonely and overwhelmed, and I do not want the providers or me to feel as if the results are not meeting the desire (Moller, Foshay, & Huett, May/June 2008). Therefore, I have to take what the company wants into consideration first. The company wants the employees to share information and collaborate. Then, I want to take the learner’s needs into consideration. The learner wants this to be quick and efficient. After consideration, I will use CourseSites to host my learning sessions. CourseSites is user-friendly on both ends of the communication spectrum, with not much technology “noise” in between (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). In this format, students can collaborate in virtual classrooms. They can also show what they know through Dropbox assignments. Finally, they can easily share documents. In the arena of CourseSites, I will be able to provide virtual learning linked to that site as well. Using something like Second Life or Active Worlds, I could create virtual tutorials of what the students would need to do in real life (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009). Also, Podcasting the steps of the new system could also be beneficial to learners. CourseSites is easily customizable to fit the exact needs of the students.
Besides being user-friendly, another advantage of CourseSites is that it is free. Therefore, the company can save money on this training while still reaching its educational goals. The Podcasting can also be free depending on who does it. If I make and produce it myself, then it is essentially free. However, the idea of using Second Life and Active Worlds is where the financial burden comes in. These sites cost money to get into the good bracket of tools. If I really wanted to do virtual tours of the new information system and the company did not want to pay for the interactive sites, then I could produce my own live action tutorial and post as a video. Second Life and Active Worlds are just another way to get through to a younger audience if that is what my audience turns out to be.
CourseSites will be the perfect fit to support all of the technology tools I want to use to create the best learning environment for this situation.
Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the web (Part 1: Training and development). TechTrends, 52(3), 70–75.
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)