In module five, I created an online lesson on Basic InDesign styles. I work with Canvas learning management system in my role as Senior Software Application Specialist. I found Moodle much more challenging than any aspect of Canvas. I understand that there is a learning curve when implementing any new technology but, my issues went beyond simply being unfamiliar. I found it less than intuitive. Specifically, I did not understand the seemingly random locations of some of the editing tools. Some were located in the main section just above the block while others, such as adding questions to the quiz, are located in the settings panel.
I also encountered strange behavior in how the blocks displayed when using the Topics format. The assessments, reflections, and practice exercise files were not available to the end user. While visible, the user was not able to click on the links. In the edit mode, all worked as expected. After much troubleshooting and searching for a solution, I discovered it was a known issue in Moodle. I resolved the problem by changing the format to folder view.
Despite my challenges with Moodle, I did enjoy this module. I can certainly understand the importance of experimenting with multiple learning management systems. Just over a year ago, we were in the midst of moving from Docebo LMS and evaluated Canvas and Moodle. Due to time limitations, the evaluation methods were less than thorough and we chose Canvas. Given the brief testing period, I often wondered if we made the right decision. After creating the lesson for this module, I can say confidently that we did. While I enjoy using Moodle as a student, I found it cumbersome for the instructional designer.
This assignment really made me consider much of what I thought about educational technology. I had mistakenly thought it to be a fairly new field. I found it of particular interest that the term ‘new media’ was being used to describe the inclusion of motion picture in curricula in 1922. Although familiar with SCORM, the I did not realize it was a concept created by the DoD and ADL.
While watching the Looking Backward, Thinking Forward video, I made several notes from the timeline. I could not help but notice the similarity in delivery methods despite the differences in technology. Lectures via radio and motion picture projectors have simply been replaced by podcasts, webinars and online video tutorials on YouTube, an LMS or MOOC.
Our society equates change with risk. By definition, innovation is constant change. Due to this fluidity, technological innovation is often met with skepticism. Although it is prudent to avoid the ineffectual adoption of technology, it is imperative that fear of the unknown not be allowed to stagnate all progress.
Educational Technology is the proactive pursuit and timely implementation of the most innovative, effective tools, processes and perspectives to ensure learners move beyond mere memorization to full comprehension, application, and most significantly, retention of knowledge. All adopted methods should be evaluated for relevance, appropriateness and accessibility to the target audience. Consideration should be made to ensure the security of the learners, infrastructure and intellectual property. Constant, objective evaluation of the chosen tools and procedures is necessary to avoid rigidity.
Module 1 Reflection Melissa St. Laurent 504 – Spring 2013 I have been a corporate trainer for 7 years. I believe in what I teach and I am passionate about improving the employee experience through training. Until recently, this training was very application specific and heavily laden with demonstration. I was the subject matter expert who stood before the group andimparted mygreat wisdom upon them. Because it was very specific and role based, it was productive but lacked longevity.
I am a perfectionist. Settling for being a productive trainer would never do. It frustrated me to visit trainees after the sessions and find they had not applied what they learned. I was fully confident that I had the knowledge to make people’s jobs easier and enjoyable, IF I could capture their attention. Since standing before a group of trainees and yelling ‘listen to me, I can help you,’ was not an acceptable method, I had to find a better way to engage them.
Prior to the company wide implementation of a new software system, we began investigating the use of a learning management system. This seemed the ideal time to re-evaluate all my training methods. In addition to researching, population and maintenance of a newly deployed LMS, I began actively searching for resources to make me a better trainer. I researched educational blogs, participated in Adobe webinars, and scoured the web for information about effective training methods for adult learners. After paying $1400 for a Captivate training session that provided very little return on investment, I decided it was time to seek more formal education. That is how I found the M.E.T. program. My current career goal is to be a brilliant trainer, able to engage and enrich adult learners to improve their efficiency and work experience.
This is only my second semester at Boise State. In the first semester, I learned of many great tools to make me a more successful student. I tried to apply some of the technology to my professional life but for the most part, the tools were not really relevant. I did benefit a great deal from using the LMS. It gave me the opportunity to experience distance learning from the student’s perspective. This semester, I am able to see how different professors utilize the flexibility of the LMS to manage their course. With each applying different preferences, every course assumes a different style. Seeing this showcase of available tools allows me to better understand how the design of the user interface affects the user experience. With a smaller staff, we have the ability to unify the user interface. Although a standard layout may make the navigation of the site easier for the user, I do not want to limit the use of the technology.
I have found the first assignment energizing. As I mentioned in my definition post, the readings and videos caused me to delve deeper into my understanding of educational technology. This assignment is a relevant and necessary step to reach my goal. Highlights from the assigned material: History of Ed Tech Timeline 1922 Motion picture defined as New Media 1930 University student listens to lecture on radio 1943 World market for computers = 5 I found this particularly interesting given that I have:
Smartphone with Windows OS
iPad
Samsung tablet with Windows 8
Dell laptop
Custom built desktop
Dell media server
Graphic courtesy of E.L. Counts, Jr.
1946 Dales Cone of Experience
1949 Computers may weigh as little as 1.5 Tons Consider smartphones & tablets. More power, smaller device.
1950 TVs introduced into classroom 1970 Texas Instrument calculator
1981 640k ought to be enough for anyone – Bill Gates
This seems funny now. I remember buying a computer with a 40G hard drive and thinking I would never fill it up.Ironically, many of the devices that are on the market today have moved to much smaller internal storage, as they utilize cloud storage. Bill Gates may be proven right after all.
1990 Web & Disks
2000 Blackboard | Smartboard | Moodle | Internet | Facebook | MOOC | YouTube | Smartphones | Text
New Media is not a new term or movement, just relative to the era
Change is constant
Many classrooms of today resemble those of the past
How much has the teaching & learning process really changed?
Motion picture replaced by YouTube, video tutorials online or on LMS
Radio lecture replaced by podcasts
Smartboards replace blackboards
Blackboard replaces Smartboard
Moodle replaces grade book
TBL is synchronous with eLearning
TBL Benefits
Accessibility
Scalability
Ease of updates
Self paced
Cost
Learner centric
Discovery learning
TBL challenges
Digital divide
Absence of authority figure – social loafing
Attrition
Device compatibility
Initial investment
Access for learners with disabilities This is not something I had considered with our corporate LMS. How will an employee with a disability achieve same level of training? The tutorials rely heavily on visual cues.
Although acceptance continues to grow, online schools may not get the same respect as traditional brick & mortar universities.
This does not really affect the corporate system. I have encountered a similar situation with customers who still believe the employees would benefit more from face to face training than the same training given remotely.
How do we create simulations, goal based scenarios and games out of the application? We need a way to entangle employee education with entertaining user experience.
Our current blended training process is both asynchronous & synchronous.
Videos and quizzes can be taken on users’ schedule
Videos can be paused
Specific dates for live trainings via gotomeeting
Users must have related videos & quizzes completed prior to live training.
Instructor-Centric, Content-Centric and Learner-Centric Teaching
SCORM developed by DoD’s ADL
Personal growth courses
Former employees cite lack of training as reason for leaving.- Home Depot
A well trained employee is a productive employee
A productive employee has confidence in their contribution
A productive, confident employee is a happy employee.
Happy employees is less likely to seek other employment
According to the Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States, the number of students enrolled in one+ online course(s) increased by to 6.7 million. Full 2013 report available here.
University of Phoenix
“rolling-cohort” enrollment model 8-13 students
Instructors must work in the field they teach
Working students take only 1 class a semester
outcomes-driven
assessment of the course material
assessment of the students
modules completed in order by specific date
content via online media
professors are advised not to lecture
small classes = low attrition rates
97% completion rate
Assessment
Reaction – surveys
Learning – pre & post training evaluations
Behavior – Are the users transferring the knowledge to action?
Results – Was the goal met?
ROI
Key principles
Do not forego Human Interaction
Active engagement is critical
Content must be relevant & timely
Feedback eliminates isolation
Change is continuous.
Great work is risky & challenging. As you increase competency and comfort, great work becomes good work. (from Do More Great Work by Michael Bungay Stanier.) I believe the same is true for technology. Watch the Great Work you tube video.
I do not work in a school but was granted special permission to use my employer as the subject of my survey and evaluation. I enjoyed the evaluation process very much. It gave me the opportunity to take an objective look at the technology company I work for, considering areas that need improvement and the areas where improvement is attainable.
There were a few hurdles to overcome with this assignment. Due to the small, close knit nature of our team, maintaining objectivity was somewhat difficult. Modifying the structure of the survey was a bit challenging. Demographic information of a school or district with one physical location is more clearly explained than that of a student body which is scattered across the United States. Due to the nature of the our business, the overall rankings in the technology survey are most likely higher than a school survey.
I found the maturity benchmarks survey spreadsheet of particular benefit. I believe I will be able to incorporate portions of this form with an existing form our company uses to evaluate the hardware and software needs of properties prior to the implementation of a new system. As our company offers more hosted SaaS solutions to our customers, success is dictated by the quality of connectivity available in the region. Adding this to the pre-implementation property evaluation will allow us to be proactive in addressing ISP and network infrastructure issues.
Below is a link to the full survey and evaluation.
Technology Use Planning is a detailed, collaborative effort which evaluates the current conditions of an institution; defines the specific learning goals; establishes a clear timeline for the achievement of desired goals; determines and implements the technology best suited to recognize the desired outcome, giving full consideration to current availability and future innovation, and continually evaluates the success rate of the conclusions and the process in an objective manner, revising as needed to ensure ongoing progress.
The process of creating a technology use plan should not be considered a sprint, nor a marathon. A sprint is a fast paced, high energy race that is quickly over with a clearly defined individual winner. A marathon requires much more endurance to complete, has multiple winners but lacks a clearly defined time frame for completion. A better analogy would be that of a cross country team. Cross country racing requires the cooperation of an entire team of athletes skilled in running with endurance through a variety of terrain to achieve a common goal. Creating a plan for the beneficial implementation and use of technology to further prepare students for advancement beyond their current skill level, becoming more efficient and innovative lifelong learners requires the efforts of a team of experts. Stakeholders include administration, teachers, parents, students, community leaders, business partners, technology professionals, and public officials. Each bring a unique insight based on their varied experience and full participation is paramount to the success of the project. The plan should be an explicit outline for future technological endeavors that is goals driven, containing a clear scope and milestones for completion, within a concise time frame. While an assessment of the current strengths and weaknesses should be included, it is important to project a positive and encouraging outlook, presenting to the audience an attainable plan for future success, not a summary of past pitfalls.
Despite being created nearly 2 decades ago, the Guidebook for Developing an Effective Instructional Technology Plan created by the graduate students at Mississippi State University remains relevant. It serves a great resource to organize the seemingly monumental task into manageable phases resulting in a clear, easily understood product containing a concise plan for the incorporation of technology in education using the most transparent manner possible. In Phase 1, a team of experts is assembled who will perform extensive research for the second phase. The third phase utilizes the research and the advise of the experts to formulate a plan of action. A written document containing the details of those decisions is organized in a formal written presentation in phase 4. The resulting document may include some or all of the following elements.
Cover Sheet
Title Page
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
Executive Summary
Vision Statement
Mission Statement
Demographics
Committee Membership
General Introduction
Data Collection, Analysis and Reporting
Plan Preparations
Critical Issues
Evaluation
Budget
Bibliography
Glossary
Appendices
Index
The executive summary is arguably the most important element of phase four. Due to the extensive and vast nature of the report and the varied backgrounds of the intended audience, it may be the only segment read by everyone. Brevity and clarity should be the goal when constructing the executive summary but, the major points of the plan must be highlighted to ensure complete comprehension.
The final phase described in the process is the ongoing evaluation and revision of the plan, implementing improvements as needed. Phase 5 is crucial for the continued growth, innovation and infusion of technology into any environment. It is this continual critique that prevents the stagnation of advancement. Constant consideration of the desired outcomes pushes us beyond our comfort level, challenging us to find solutions to new questions.
The 2010 National Educational Technology Plan provides specific educational goals for our nation as a whole. It outlines Obama administration’s expectation of transformation of the educational system ultimately resulting in economic recovery. The plan addresses learning, teaching, productivity, assessment and infrastructure. The plan serves as a call to action for the administrative professionals, educators and even students. This should be used a starting point to spark thought and discussion in individual districts and schools to rethink everything that is known about education. It serves to challenge the educators be innovative in their methods, modifying their means to better engage the students, preparing them for real world experiences. The NETP details the Department of Education’s role in the promotion of change. Technically, it serves as an excellent example of the components of a technology use plan. Abstractly, it serves as a permission slip from the United States government to every school and teacher to assess their current environment and implement drastic change, now.
I agree with John See’s opinion that to be effective, technology plans should be short term, as presented in Developing Effective Technology Plans. Even with the use of resources such as the Horizon report or CIO’s annual Emerging Technologies study, it is impossible to predict with any accuracy the hardware and software that will be available five years from now.
Looking at Everett Roger’s Diffusion of Innovation graph, innovators are the first group, followed by early adopters, the early majority, the late majority and finally the laggards. Typically, the education market has been late majority adopters of technology. As See inferred, this may be due to creation of long term technology plans that are not re-evaluated, thus locking the institution into purchasing specific hardware or software. This is contrary to the challenges presented in the NETP, which calls for innovation and transformation.
Historically there is an inverse relationship between the number of adopters and the cost of the innovation. That is, as time passes and the price of ownership falls due to competition between manufacturers, the number of adopters increases. Given this model, risk, and budget constraints, it is unlikely that the education market will ever fall in the innovators’ category. Based on the goals in the NETP, the education system must aspire to achieve status of early adopters’ category and settle for nothing less than early majority, thus staying ahead of the curve.
Regarding See’s opinion that “effective technology plans focus on applications, not technology,” I could not agree more. While software developers continue to strive to create applications that are device independent, not all have reached their goal. Working in a technology firm that supports many multimedia companies, I have encountered on several occasions software that will only run on a mac. Some applications are even more specific and will only run on a specific version of the Apple OS. In a corporate environment, this typically involves industry specific, proprietary software that has little competition and great expense. When using niche specific software, which is far from device independent, it would be impossible to choose the hardware first.
As a senior software application specialist responsible for the implementation of computer systems, I have a good deal of experience with technology use planning. The technology company I work for continually evaluates and streamlines our process. We use project planning tools to ensure every aspect of a project is assigned and completed in a timely manner, constantly aware of the scope of the project. I have completed 4 major installations in 2012 and upon completion of each, I have assessed the methods used and made necessary modifications to improve the next cycle. We work diligently to stay ahead of the curve, testing new technology to improve our customers efficiency, revenue and capacity for growth. Although not presented in the same formal manner, many of our processes mimic those in the Guidebook for Developing an Effective Instructional Technology Plan and the 2010 National Educational Technology Plan.
This project aligns with the following AECT standards:
1.3 Instructional Strategies
2.3 Computer-Based Technologies
2.4 Integrated Technologies
3.2 Diffusion of Innovations
3.3 Implementation and Institutionalization
3.4 Policies and Regulations
4.1 Project Management
4.2 Resource Management
5.1 Problem Analysis
5.2 Criterion-Referenced Measurment
5.3 Formative and Summative Evaluation
5.4 Long-Range Planning
References:
Anderson, L., Al-Weshail, A. S., Baxter, A. L., Cherry, W., Hill, E. W., Jones, C. R., … Woods, J. C. (1996). Guidebook for Developing an Effective Instructional Technology Plan. Mississippi State University. Retrieved from http://www.nctp.com/downloads/guidebook.pdf
U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology. (2010). Transforming American education: Learning powered by technology Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/technology/netp-2010
As a lifelong perfectionist, I have always dreaded the idea of collaboration. I regret to admit that it requires little introspection to realize the source of the dread is hidden arrogance. I have high standards for myself and others, often acting under the misconception that nobody will achieve the level of excellence that I expect. Having worked with groups in the past which did not meet those expectations, lacking either in quality or participation, I cringed when I saw the collaborative project on the syllabus. When it came time to choose a group, I actually changed groups several times. Knowing absolutely nothing about my classmates and attempting to choose proved quite torturous. Switching between groups hints at insanity. Ultimately, I found myself in Alpha group and I am happy to report that the angst that I felt in the weeks leading up to this project was all in vain. From the initial contact via the small group discussion forum, I felt more at ease. During the Google+ hangout, it became abundantly clear that I was surrounded by a great team with the same high standards.
The Task at Hand:We were charged with addressing the issues of digital divide and digital inequality given seven options and a $50 million budget. The options were to be ranked by our team to determine the best use of the budget. Below are the suggested options.
Install computers in all public libraries in the state and expand the hours when the computers are available.
Expand staffing and other resources so that public schools can be open to the public after normal school hours, on weekends, and during the summer months.
Provide individuals in disadvantaged communities with computers.
Provide high-speed Internet and mobile access for all state residents.
Subsidize Internet Service Providers to provide low-cost Internet to all state residents.
Provide information literacy courses to enhance computer skills and enable knowledgeable use of digital technologies.
Develop free online educational content, giving first priority to content most relevant to lower socio-economic groups before content that is relevant to the rest of the public
Instead of simply choosing one option, we incorporated all the options into a comprehensive solution that we feel will better meet the needs of the masses.
The Tools:Whatever did we do before Google? We used Google+ Hangouts for our initial meeting. Our written communication began using the small group forum in moodle but we opted to move to gmail when our discussion was inadvertently deleted. Our presentation was created using Google presentation. Although it lacks some of the more polished features of Microsoft Powerpoint, Presentation enables multiple people to collaborate on the project synchronously. Removing the linear constraints of Powerpoint provides all team members with total access to the project until the final stages. This eliminates the need for multiple copies of same project, drastically reducing the risk of team members make corrections to the wrong version. I will use this approach in my office in the future when it is necessary to collaborate on presentations.
In addition to the Google software suite, we used Powerpoint for narration. We also used an online service, Freecoroder to download a YouTube video which was embedded into our presentation inside Powerpoint. YouTube videos can be imported directly into Google Presentation but when converted to Powerpoint, the embedded video did not play properly.
My role: Based on a partnership that my employer has with a local university, I suggested that we use interns to offset some of the staffing costs. We expanded on this model to include refurbishing computers. Given my experience with the program, I was the natural choice to elaborate on the benefit of internships to the program, the interns and the institutions. This concept can be seen in the Trash or Treasure video and the following slide which discusses our solution to provide home computers to program graduates.
I was also responsible for the Closing the Gap slide which recaps all the elements included in our proposal and addresses the impact of the digital divide and digital inequality on all of mankind.
Beyond my role in research and the creation of content, I was tasked with unifying the project when one of our teammates fell ill. Although the project was created by 6 individuals, we felt it was important that it appear as 1 cohesive and consistent proposal. To achieve this goal, I modified the digital divide caution sign that one of my teammates had chosen and implemented it in some form on every slide. Following the same theme, I created an original graphic for slide 3, How to Navigate the Digital Divide?, which lists all the 7 options for the scenario.
My reflections:Like many people who I have discussed this project with, my initial reaction to the term digital divide or digital inequality would be to consider the lack of technology in third world countries or the poor communities in our own country. I had not fully considered any factors beyond economics. I now realize that there are many things that can impede technology such as age. Often we refer to the younger generations with amazement when it is realized that they have never known a world without computers, cellular phones, Google or many other technologies. With such attention drawn to technological advancement, it easy to overlook the opposite end of the spectrum, the elderly. It had not occurred to me the number of services that require an online application and the expectation that the elderly be equipped to interact with a cyber world. I also had not considered the number of geographic regions within our own country that would be ecstatic with the dial up that I would only use as a punchline.
Because I work in a technology company, I am often surrounded by the next greatest thing. At this very moment, I have in my possession an ipad, a Samsung slate with Windows 8 Professional, and a $3500 Dell laptop, all of which were issued to me by my company. Being afforded such luxury had made me oblivious to the technological plight of the rest of the world. Perception is reality. At the risk of sounding shallow and self centered, I did not consider the effects of the digital divide and digital inequality prior to this project because I did not see it. This project has provoked me to consider how technology limitations could prevent the advancement of the human race. What if the person who has the potential and mental capacity to cure cancer never does simply because they are born to a family in the inner city of Detroit with no access to a computer or if the person capable of ending world hunger is not exposed to the issue because they live in a rural area with no access to the internet?
AECT Standards:Many AECT standards were addressed in this project, some for the collaborative method used to create the project and others for the subject matter of the project.
1.1 Instructional Systems Design is addressed in the creation of a comprehensive educational program to eliminate the digital divide and digital inequality.
1.2 Message would be utilized in the development of the free online content for use in the proposed program.
1.3 Instructional Strategies are utilized in the ranking of the options and the sequencing of the training that the participants would recieve.
1.4 Learner characteristics is addressed as we determine the subject matter for the free online content. This is also a consideration when creating the criteria by which a participant qualifies to receive a refurbished computer.
2.2 Audiovisual Technologies, 2.3 Computer-based technologies and 2.4 Integrated Technologies would all be addressed in the creation of materials for the scenario and also the creation of the presentation for the proposal.
All aspects of standard 3; 3.1 Media Utilization, 3.2 Diffusion of Innovations, 3.3 Implementation & Institutionalization and 3.4 Policies & Regulations are explored throughout the proposal content and in the execution of the proposal.
Likewise, standard 4 Management is evident in both the comprehensive educational plan that is proposed and the collaborative method used for the proposal. Both require the project management (4.1), resource management (4.2), delivery system management (4.3) and information management (4.4).
Our team utilized elements of standard 5 for the development of our proposal. Specifically, 5.1 Problem analysis and 5.4 Long-range planning were crucial.
For the Zotero assignment, I chose to research eLearning in the corporate world. Like many of the tools we are now using, I appreciate the ease of collaboration. This is yet another example of how technology improves eLearning by removing the manual labor and allowing students to focus on academics.
I soon learned that although convenient, Zotero is far from thorough. Most of the fields were left vacant and required the information to be populated by the reader. When exporting the references from the browser or the stand alone version, it is still necessary to check all the references for accuracy. The formatting was not proper. The title of articles was consistently exported in title case instead of sentence case. The journal names and volumes were not italicized. I used Word to modify the references as necessary. It was a bit frustrating that copying and pasting the references into the EDTECH forum and wordpress resulted in the loss of formatting.
It is a bit ironic how quickly I moved from being ecstatic with the discovery of a new tool to disappointment with its failure to meet my expectations. I am certain this is just a side affect of our society’s constant inundation and the growing accessibility of improved technology. We quickly dismiss any application that falls short of its full potential and adopt the latest trending app. Although this may sound like a negative view of innovation, it is quite the contrary. High expectation spurs innovation to the next level. I believe this is merely a modern case of supply and demand. As the end users demand more feature rich applications, software developers compete to supply them with just that.
Below are my references.
Choy, S. (2009). Transformational learning in the workplace. Journal of Transformative Education, 7(1), 65–84. doi:10.1177/1541344609334720
Ha, T. S. (2008). How IT workers learn in the workplace. Studies in Continuing Education, 30(2), 129–143. doi:10.1080/01580370802097728
Ren, C. R., & Guo, C. (2011). Middle managers’ strategic role in the corporate entrepreneurial process: Attention-based effects. Journal of Management, 37(6), 1586–1610. doi:10.1177/0149206310397769
melissastlaurent 