Background: According to the constructivist and social learning theory, collaborative learning is one of the most effective ways to advance a learner’s understanding on a subject. However, many students, even some that excel individually, dislike group work or find it difficult.
Collaborating with groups to achieve project goals can be difficult for a number of reasons. The challenge increases even more when that group is communicating online and at a distance. The group can suffer from a lack of communication and coordination, or some groups, feeling a lack of leadership may feel that it is “the blind leading the blind.” Some members complain about the relative lack of participation of some of the learners within the group, and so on.
Prompt: Recall an experience you had with an online group activity, and consider the following questions:
• What was effective about the group and worked well?
• What tools and methods did you use to communicate, and how well did they work for the group?
• What were some of the challenges that you or the group encountered?
• What could the instructor or course designer have done to make improvements to the course or enhance the group experience?
• What could you or other members of your group have done to improve the group experience? What will you do differently in the future?
Post a response by Friday in response to the questions above, and cite one of the following resources below for your post.
Return Saturday to see if anyone has responded to your comments.
The rubric for this discussion post is located here:
[Link Coming Soon—will have to upload via Google Drive as Blogger.com does not have a file manager].
References/Resources:
Laureate Education (Producer). (2011). Assessing interaction and collaboration in online environments [Video file]. Retrieved from https://class.waldenu.edu
Oosterhof, A., Conrad, R.-M., & Ely, D. P. (2008). Assessing learners online. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Thursday, April 16, 2015
Saturday, March 14, 2015
When and Why Cheating is Cheating, and How to Deter It
I’m making a late post for my Online Strategies course about
Plagiarism and Cheating in online environments. In order to create this post, I
watched a video by Dr. Rena Palloff and Dr. Keith Pratt about Cheating and
Plagiarism. In it, Palloff stated that the rate of cheating in online and
traditional environments were about the same, and that from her experience,
students did not set out to be cheaters, and intentional cheating and
plagiarism is rare. Pratt then added that he created his assessments in such a
way that he didn’t care whether or not students cheated, because the
assessments and assignments were meant to reflect real-world environments. So,
a student could talk to a neighbor, or look something up in a book, but there
was more work to be done than that to complete the assessment. Palloff agreed,
and said that when the assessment requires one to apply available information
to problem-solving, it makes it more difficult to “cheat” in the traditional
sense. Here, the assessment requires more than memorization, but synthesized
application (Laureate Education, Inc., n.d.).
I think that is one of the most important points about
cheating and plagiarism: Cheating isn’t cheating because a student has found an
easy way to get the answers to a test. “Cheating” is cheating if and when it
undermines the learning process and makes what should be an equal playing field
unequal. If the assessment is measuring critical thinking and problem solving
rather than memorization, then looking something up in a book isn’t “cheating.”
It’s being resourceful, which is what we do in “the real world.” Therefore, the
construction of the assessment towards critical thinking and problem solving
can encourage intellectual and academic honesty. They can’t “Google” the right
answer because there isn’t one right answer. The student has to find one in
their own words…
Educating students early in the online environment and managing
expectations at the onset is also important to prevent unintentional plagiarism.
However, the research might not agree with Palloff that plagiarism and cheating
is rare, or that expectation management alone with deter the vast majority of
plagiarism and cheating. Cheating and plagiarism here, refers to lifting
partial or whole passages of another person’s work and leading one to believe
it is your own when it is not. A study at Penn State University using Turnitin
detected plagiarism in about 13 percent of cases, whereas manual detection only
caught plagiarism in the same set of assignments 3 percent of the time. Further,
the research showed that expectation management and education regarding
plagiarism may have made some impact, but the difference was not statistically
significant. So, tools like Turnitin seem necessary if you want to prevent
people from borrowing the words and thoughts of others without proper
attribution (Jocoy, & DiBiase, 2006). Again, the key here is not using
another’s work—that’s encouraged. It’s simply using another’s work without
proper attribution, or using so much of the work that it undermines the
learning process. Where it becomes clear that the student was trying to merely
complete the assignment rather than think critically about a problem and use
another’s work to support their own thought process. This may be painfully
obvious, but it seems worth it to point out what makes “cheating” cheating, or
wrong, or counterproductive to learning…
The best method to prevent dishonesty and cheating or “stealing”
of another’s work would likely be the way that we prevent all other forms of
stealing and dishonesty: Deterrence. You don’t have to make cheating
impossible. You just have to make it harder than doing the honest thing. Once
you reach that point, cheating loses its appeal. By making the assessment more
about critical thinking than facts, it makes cheating harder. Plagiarism
detection software makes it harder for students to find another person’s
thoughts on the Internet and pass it off on their own without getting caught.
Combine those two tools and methods and one of the only courses of action a
student has left is to ask or pay someone else to complete the assessment for
them. If the assignment is written, even in this case, a keen facilitator can
recognize the change in tone from the students typical writing to another
assignment they handed in. They would have to plagiarize nearly everything, or
nothing. The idea of cheating starts to look ridiculous, and the probably of
getting caught looks high. At this point, you’ve effectively deterred most
forms of cheating. And I think that’s the goal. Deter 97% of cheating, and
catch the other 3% that will be determined to cheat even when it doesn’t make
sense to do so. That’s my best advice…
References:
Jocoy, C., & DiBiase, D. (2006). Plagiarism by adult
learners online: A case study in detection and remediation. International
Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 7(1), 1-15.
Laureate Education (Producer). (2010). Plagiarism and cheating [Video
file]. Retrieved from https://class.waldenu.edu
Thursday, March 5, 2015
Assessing the Assessments
We see this pattern with learning
technologies as well. Why aren’t online assessments keeping up with new
technology? Because they can’t, and we can’t. The pace of technology growth is
outstripping our ability to keep up with it. Furthermore, you are combining the
field of technology (a fast-growing, fast-paced industry) with pedagogy and
education, a field that is notorious for its love of tradition and reticence to
change. You have new technologies that crop up constantly, and early adopters
are saying, “Who-hoo! Digital glitter! Shiny! New! This will make learning fun,
and show our stakeholders we’re culturally relevant and on the cutting edge!”
Meanwhile, traditional pedagogues are saying, “Wait a minute. That hasn’t been
tested! Who’s to say that actually WORKS in making the learning process more effective?”
This is essentially the reason Whitelock and Watt (2008) gave for the current
gap in assessments against the new tide of technology. It’s one thing to get
creative with the lesson plan and throw in social media or some new technology,
but when it comes to the assessment and metrics, people want tried and true
methods for testing if the learning was effective.
So
that’s one issue. Another issue is that some of the old multiple choice test
questions, which get translated into e-Learning as simple multiple choice quiz
slides, are woefully inadequate for testing most of the upper tiers of Bloom’s
Taxonomy. It’s hard to know if a mechanic is learning how to do their job when
you are asking them trivia about transmission parts or the history of a car instead
of having him demonstrate how to take one apart and put it back together. So
why do we stick with multiple choice and assessments? That’s what we’ve always
done—again the tradition answer—and it’s also easy. Doing a demonstration
assessment, especially online, presents certain technical challenges that
require a lot of thought, effort, and time to come up with (Clare-Midura &
Dede, 2010).
Daphne
Koller addressed this problem on the TED stage, and discussed how anything
other than multiple choice answers online was hard to pull off. How do you have
a quiz auto-grade an essay or short answer, for example? One suggestion she
gives is self-assessment coupled with peer review. This dovetails in with the
suggestion of Midura & Dede, 2010 that mentoring and direct observation
with feedback, etc., are more effective methods than paper tests or multiple
choice. While peers are seen as being on “equal footing” to their other peers,
this is not consistent across the board. Each peer has strengths and weaknesses
in a variety of areas, and can mentor others in those areas where they are
strongest. The cumulative interaction of peers creates a kind of mentor in an
online space.
We
have many cool opportunities for new ways of looking at assessments, whether
through virtual worlds or a video conference call where people share their
screens and demonstrate what they know, etc. Mini-games, as long as they are
tied to the learning objective, can also be an effective and fun assessment.
What needs to happen now is that these methods need to be tested. When you look
at something like Lumosity.com, it boasts how their games are based on “brain-science,”
and that they can boost your memory and other cognitive skills. However, the
consensus at this point is that these games don’t work. What’s actually
happening is that you are getting better at playing the games themselves, but
there is no evidence as of yet to suggest that this translates to anything
outside of playing these games. This should be a warning to us regarding
adopting new methods of assessment too soon. However, one rule of thumb is to
keep the assessment as close to the real world as possible. The more the
assessment feels like the real thing, the better chance you have of making that
assessment more effective. This is why flight simulations work and
Luminosity.com doesn’t.
What
are your thoughts for the future of assessment? Leave a comment if you’d like.
References:
Clarke-Midura, J., & Dede, C.
(2010). Assessment, technology, and change. Journal of Research on
Technology in Education, 42(3), 309-328.
Retrieved from the Walden Library using the Education Research Complete database.
Retrieved from the Walden Library using the Education Research Complete database.
Koller, D. (Speaker). (2012, Jun.). What
we’re learning from online education. Ted Talks, LLC. Retrieved from: http://www.ted.com/talks/daphne_koller_what_we_re_learning_from_online_education?language=en
Whitelock, D., & Watt, S.
(2008). Reframing e-assessment: Adopting new media and adapting old frameworks.
Learning, Media, and Technology, 33(3), 151-154.
Retrieved from the Walden Library using the Communication & Mass Media Complete database.
Retrieved from the Walden Library using the Communication & Mass Media Complete database.
Friday, February 6, 2015
Useability, Accessibility, and Technology Tools
This post is in response to an assignment from my MS
degree. A peer in my class uses a Q&A format for his blog post assignments,
so I thought I would try that this time around as well.
Q: What impact does technology and multimedia have
on online learning environments?
A: I think that technology and multimedia in online
learning environments can be a double-edged sword. On the plus side, there is
an unprecedented amount of new technologies that can connect us in new,
exciting, and creative ways that weren’t possible even a few short years ago.
Wikis, blogs, YouTube videos, Skype, discussion boards, cloud-based web tools
like Google Drive, and so on make sharing and collaborating at a distance more
robust than ever. On the other hand, the drawback is that there is an unprecedented
amount of technology out there, and it’s nearly impossible to keep up with it
all. Even for the technologically initiated, there just isn’t enough time to
know about or learn how to use all of this digital technology. The danger here
is that when learners are meeting online to reach certain learning objectives
that they end up diverting a lot of their time to figuring out how to use the
online tools instead.
Q: What are the most important considerations an
online instructor should make before implementing technology?
A: The most important consideration of all is
whether or not the technology is directly in service of the learning goals set
forth for the course or online community; instructors should resist the urge to
fall into the content seduction trap (Laureate Education, Inc., n.d.). Cooper,
Colwell, and Jelfs (2007) refer to this as usability. The other important
consideration for instructors is to facilitate peers connecting with each and
feeling connected to their other students. Careful planning should be taken to
make sure that the technology is helping rather than hinder participants.
Q: What implications do usability and accessibility of
technology tools have for online teaching?
A: As Cooper, Colwell, and Jelfs (2007) point out,
accessibility and usability affect one another. The more accessible, or able a
course or tool is to adjust to all learners an online tool is, the more likely
it is to be useable—or efficient in meeting learning objectives and goals. Many
refer to accessibility in terms of catering to the disabled—things like using
Closed Captioning for the deaf, for example. However, someone who is on the bus
and doesn’t have headphones would be able to benefit from the same Closed
Captioning due to the setting in which he’s viewing the training. That learner might
not have a disability, but now the training has become for useable and
efficient for him.
Q: What technology tools are most appealing to you
for online teaching as you move forward in your career in instructional design?
A: I think there’s a lot of promising technologies
out there. I’m surprised how much YouTube has exploded over the years. A lot of
times I will look for how-to videos on YouTube, and I have also been able to
find courses from Stanford University on there for free as well. IM chats and
wiki pages are also very helpful. Again, I don’t think the technology has to be
fancy, but if it’s useful it passes the test for me. I think the push for
mobile technology and training is interesting, but I have my reservations. I
think there is a point at which a screen is just too small for effective
training. The iPad seems like a good size, but mobile phone screens just seem
to small… Anway, for what its worth, those are my two cents.
References:
Cooper, M.,
Colwell, C., & Jelfs, A. (2007). Embedding accessibility and usability:
Considerations for e-learning research and development projects. ALT-J:
Research in Learning Technology, 15(3), 231-245.
Laureate Education (Producer). (2010). Enhancing the
online experience [Video file]. Retrieved
from
https://class.waldenu.edu
Friday, January 23, 2015
Launching the Online Experience
In order for learner’s to have a positive learning
experience, the instructor has to prepare a good amount before the course even
begins. An instructor needs to know the layout of the course and course
management system so that he or she is prepared to upload documents and
pictures, set up groups and forums, grade assignments, and all of the other
tasks necessary for running a course (Boettcher & Conrad, 2010). Also,
there may be technology that the instructor has access to but is unaware if he
or she doesn’t take the time to explore the course layout and content, as well as some software that
are freely available on the web. Wiki pages and other social media sites can
help students communicate and collaborate with one another.
In addition, it’s important that the instructor be
frequently present in the course in the first two weeks. This is a time to set
clear expectations to students so they are aware of the standard of work that
is required as well as what to do in the course. If these expectations are
reinforced in the first couple weeks it makes the course go a lot more
smoothly.
Finally, I think it’s important for an instructor to be a
careful observer of the classroom. If a student drops off in participation or
appears to be struggling, it’s often up to the instructor to find out why.
Going the extra mile to show you care is important. Laureate Education, Inc.,
n.d. recommended showing ways you care and also opening up and showing your
human side in the classroom. It helps to be personable and engaging in order to
keep the students’ interest. Don’t simply post your CV when creating a bio, for
example.
References:
Boettcher, J. V., & Conrad, R. (2010). The online
teaching survival guide: Simple and practical pedagogical tips. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Conrad, R., & Donaldson, J. A. (2011). Engaging the
online learner: Activities and resources for creative instruction (Updated ed.).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Laureate Education, Inc., n.d. Launching the online experience. Retrieved from: https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_6530133_1%26url%3D
Sunday, January 11, 2015
Creating a Better Recipe for Online Training
This week I’m reflecting on a video by Laureate
Education, Inc. (n.d.) featuring Pratt & Palloff as they discussed how to
build an online learning community. If you are reading this and haven’t seen
the video, don’t worry, as I’ll briefly summarize key points from the video
throughout the post.
It would seem a good place to start by making the
simple declarative statement that learning does not occur in a vacuum.
Regardless of whether or not the learning is taking place in a classroom or
in-person meeting, or online, certain key ingredients are needed to increase
the odds of successful learning with the greatest number of students possible.
I think of traditional learning like a traditional recipe
cookie, and online learning like a Gluten-Free cookie. In a traditional setting,
the social interactions in a classroom is like the wheat flour, and is a key
ingredient in the learning process. With a Gluten-Free cookie, the wheat flour
is missing, and therefore, certain nutrients and textures and flavors might be
missing, too. So what works great for a traditional cookie recipe (the
classroom) won’t work for a GF cookie (online). For online training, a blend of
other “GF flour” and key ingredients are needed to supplement what is missing
from traditional training to keep students engaged and learning.
First, the people and purpose of online training
could be virtually identical to that of traditional training, but the methods,
process, and creation of social presence will be different. What follows are
some good recipe tips for an online training course:
Methods. You cannot see your students in most cases,
or at the very least you cannot address their issues immediately in an online
setting. This means most needs should be anticipated. Considerations of “accessibility”
should be accounted for—people with disabilities or technical issues should
have more than one modality or method of introduction to the learning content
at their disposal so they can navigate courses successfully. This might include
closed captioning on videos and testing the accessibility of web links and
forums. The layout of content on the Learning Management System (LMS) or web
interface needs to be as easy to navigate as possible. This includes sound
hierarchical design geared towards learners’ needs, sensible naming
conventions, and an easy to find forum to have discussions with students and an
easy way of contacting the instructor/facilitator. A discussion board is a good
start, but other collaborative technologies should be considered, such as cell
phones, email, web chats, video conferencing, wiki pages, blogs, etc. Ensure
that all technology used is or can be well understood by participants as they
progress through the course, and don’t use any technology unless it is helping
to meet a specific learning objective.
Process. The learning process is everyone’s
responsibility, from the facilitator to the students to the administration. The
facilitator acts as an equal member in discussions and is also a learner and
participant in addition to helping facilitate and guide discussions in a
productive and supportive manner. A new student orientation and an icebreaker
at the beginning of the course will help students figure out how to navigate
the course and feel comfortable reaching out to their peers for help and
learning. A key part of the online process, stemming from a social learning
theory of learning, is to create collaborative interactions and projects where
students engage with one another and co-construct meaning and value from the
content together. This should be mixed with periods of reflection to reinforce
the learning that taken place.
Social Presence. Social presence is key to avoiding
high attrition rates in an online setting. Pratt (Laureate Education, Inc.,
n.d.) recommended watching students closely in the first two weeks and reaching
out to them if they “fall away.” If you “hook them” early and get them engaged,
they are very unlikely to fall away later in the course. Palloff (Laureate
Education, Inc., n.d.) adds to check into the course multiple times a day
especially in that critical first two weeks of class. The facilitator’s role is
to create a warm and inviting atmosphere to help overcome the often seeming
impersonal nature of online/technology mediated communication. Be creative and
use the technology to your advantage in order to create social presence. If you
have a younger audience that loves to use mobile technology, consider the use
of texting or a mobile app in your course presentation to help keep students
feeling connected and ensure that they have valuable information at their
fingertips right when they need it most.
If you follow many of these general principles, the
online course and training will improve exponentially, including the rates of
success. The main takeaway is that an online course is not just about putting
the content “out there,” but carefully considering how the content is
presented, and making an effort to connect personally and professionally with
participants to get them engaged in the learning.
Thanks for reading and comments are appreciated!
Welcome Walden U. Class, EIDT-6510!
Hello class,
I guess I'm posting this late because I forgot the blog assignments usually require posting earlier in the week. This is the same blog I've had since the Bachelor of Science in Instructional Design & Technology, so there are some older posts that are also relevant to instructional design and online training. Feel free to look around. I also look forward to reading your posts as well. See you around!
~Nathaniel
I guess I'm posting this late because I forgot the blog assignments usually require posting earlier in the week. This is the same blog I've had since the Bachelor of Science in Instructional Design & Technology, so there are some older posts that are also relevant to instructional design and online training. Feel free to look around. I also look forward to reading your posts as well. See you around!
~Nathaniel
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)