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.
Friday, December 23, 2011
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)