Week 3 - Selecting Distance Learning Technologies

The Scenario

A high school history teacher, located on the west coast of the United States, wants to showcase to her students new exhibits being held at two prominent New York City museums. The teacher wants her students to take a "tour" of the museums and be able to interact with the museum curators, as well as see the art work on display. Afterward, the teacher would like to choose two pieces of artwork from each exhibit and have the students participate in a group critique of the individual work of art. As a novice of distance learning and distance learning technologies, the teacher turned to the school district’s instructional designer for assistance. In the role of the instructional designer, what distance learning technologies would you suggest the teacher use to provide the best learning experience for her students?

Possible Learning Technologies to Use

With computer and internet-based technologies, new opportunities to provide a variety of learning activities has arisen for teachers. These new technologies promote “active learning, collaboration, mastery of course material, and student control over the learning process” (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright & Zvacek, 2009, pg. 232). Today’s children and teens are acquiring on their own, new approaches to accessing knowledge (Wiki’s, blogs, podcasts, google, facebook, etc), so it is important that from an instructional design perspective, the technology used be engaging and effective. Simonson, et al (2009) stated “the critical job of the educator is to be only as realistic as needed in order for learning to effectively occur (pg. 93). Effective use of different media allows the educator to bring sights and sound of the real world into the learning environment (Simonson, et al, 2009). As the instructional designer consulted in the above scenario, I would suggest the use of two different technologies. The first technology I would suggest the teacher use would be video conferencing with the curator at the museum. A program I recommend for this is Elluminate. Elluminate is a web-conferencing tool which allows users to view a presentation, listen to a speaker and participate in live chat. This tool would allow for real-time interaction with the curator while having an experience of visually seeing the museum through a virtual experience. Many schools and universities are utilizing technologies such as Elluminate to offer extended learning opportunities. Penn State University is one such institution. Rick Sherer, Assistant Director for Instructional Design and Delivery states "After reviewing several collaboration software tools, we felt that Elluminate Live! was the most appropriate solution for the support of synchronous events in online distance education environments (Retrieved from http://www.elluminate.com/Company/Testimonials/?id=101/ on September 25, 2010)

The second technology I would suggest the teacher use is a Wiki. A wiki “is a Web site that allows users to add and update content on the site using their own Web browser. This is made possible by Wiki software that runs on the Web server. Wikis end up being created mainly by a collaborative effort of the site visitors” (techterms.com) A wiki would allow the teacher to post pictures of the artwork chosen to include in the class discussion. The teacher could create a page for each piece of artwork and include discussion questions. The students could then create their own pages to record their thoughts about the artwork as well as answers to the discussion questions and perhaps some of their own questions. Following this, the teacher could engage the classroom in a verbal discussion to complete the learning experience. The use of a wiki in this lesson allows learners the opportunity to publish their thoughts in a collaborative environment where others can respond and engage each other in new thinking. Osgood, J. (2009), has used wiki’s in her classroom and states “The optimal benefit of using a wiki for classroom education is the ability to facilitate and document collaboration among class members".

References

Elluminate : http://www.elluminate.com/

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and Learning at a Distance: Foundations of Distance Education (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Techterms.com (2005) retrieved from: http://www.techterms.com/definition/wiki

Osgood, J. (2009). Virginia Commonwealth University School of Social Work website: retrieved from http://blog.vcu.edu/socialworknewsletter/2009/03/using_wiki_spaces_as_a_teachin.html

Week 1 - A New Course – A New Learning Experience -- Defining Distance Education

This week we investigated the history and definition of distance education. Prior to this week, had someone asked me my definition of distance education, I would have said something like “learning that occurs away from the instructor using the internet as the learning modality”. It is interesting to me that although I am very aware of correspondence courses, and instruction utilizing satellite television, or even radio, my definition would not have included these types of instruction, quite simply because today these methods seem outdated to me. As our resources state this week distance learning has evolved and therefore how one defines it will likely evolve as well. Someone who has little or no access to advanced technology or the internet would likely define distance education differently than me. My primary experience with distance education is through my courses with Walden University in pursuit of my master’s degree.

This week my definition of distance education has grown a bit. Our text, Teaching and Learning at a Distance: Foundations of Distance Education, by Simonson, Smaldino, Albright & Zvacek, defines distance learning as “an institution-based, formal education where the learning group is separated, and where interactive telecommunication systems are used to connect learners, resources, and instructors" (pg. 32). Important to this definition, are two distinctions I would add to my definition; institution-based and instructors. The addition of these two distinctions differentiates distance education from self-study. My earlier definition left room for self-study to be included in the definition of distance education. Although self-study is important and valid, self-study is neither formal, nor measurable and leaves room for misinformation, whereas formal education is more purposeful and allows for a depth of study with acknowledged and accepted certifications and degrees. So my definition after this week would be something much like the definition provided by Simonson, et al. Perhaps something more like “Institution-based, formal education where the instructor and student are separated, and the internet or other communications technology is used as a learning modality to connect the student, instructor and resources”.

I think it is important to mention, that within my "new" definition of Distance Education, both synchronous and asynchronous learning are included. I think synchronous learning, same-time, different-place instruction creates new avenues for people to participate in an educational format, yet not have to be at a specific place to obtain that education. This offers many people a level of flexibility to take courses that geographically would otherwise not be available to them. This is definitely an important advance in education beyond the traditional same time same place brick and mortar education. For me however, the real opportunity of further education lives in asynchronous learning through schools like Walden University. Asynchronous Learning has opened doors for me that otherwise would have been closed or at least would have presented as substantial barriers. The fact that I can log into a classroom, read the work of my classmates, provide my own insights and receive feedback that potentially challenges me to think further, all at a time that works in my schedule, is incredibly exciting. For me, my motivation to learn and contribute my learning to others has elevated considerably since my brick and mortar classroom days.

The future of distance education lives in both the advances in technology that occur and the advancement of the instructional design field. Huett, Moller, Foshay & Coleman (2008) state “what we are witnessing with the current evolution of distance education and the technologies that support it is nothing less than the single most important reorganization of how we will engage learners since we started to gather students together in school buildings” (p. 65). They further state that “if schools are going to make a commitment to deliver education in this format (distance education), it will require a restructuring of how they do business necessitating the hiring of distance educational instructional designers” (pg. 66). The opportunity for instructional designers is to bring a needed awareness of sound instructional design principles to the design of distance education.


Reference:

Huett, J., Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Coleman, C. (2008). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the web (Part 3: K12). TechTrends, 52(5), 63–67.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.

DISTANCE EDUCATION MIND MAP

Week 8 - Learner Motivation Reflection

Many years ago when I obtained my undergraduate degree, I took a course on learning theories. Although it has been a number of years (over 20) since I studied learning theory, what I found most surprising in this course is the wide variety of available learning theories and learning styles. I do not remember studying constructivism or connectivism, however both theories offer explanations for what I perceive as gaps in behaviorism and cognitivism. I was especially interested in the development of connectivism a learning theory that was created to address the limitations of behaviorism, cognitivism and constructivism to explain the effect technology has had on how we live, how we communicate, and how we learn (Siemens, 2005).

The required readings each week challenged me to think and rethink about my own learning style and the implications my own learning style may have on how I design coursework. As we progressed through the course, I was able to map the different theories on to my own learning and really look at how I utilize different aspects of each theory in my own learning process. My overall conclusion is that more often than not, constructivism best describes my learning process, however knowing that at times I will pull from behaviorism, provides a deeper understanding of how learning styles can fluctuate depending on the material one is learning and one’s current knowledge of the subject matter (Gilbert & Swainer, 2008). As we have progressed through the course it has become very clear that an understanding of my own learning process is important as an Instructional Designer. I believe that an individual is automatically predisposed to design courseware based on how that person learns. Without the understanding of my own learning process, as well as knowledge of learning theory, it is quite probable that my design efforts may not reach individuals with a different learning style or process than my own. Having this awareness allows me to incorporate various learning styles and theories into my instructional design.

As I reflect on what I have learned in this course, a question I have been asked to consider is: what have I learned regarding the connection between learning theories, learning styles, educational technology, and motivation? I think one can look at how these four topics are connected from a number of vantage points, however given the educational program I am in is Instructional Design and Technology, I would have to say a connecting force is the instructional designer. As an instructional designer begins the process of design, all of these topics must be considered. The ID (instructional designer) must have a comprehensive knowledge of learning theory and the different ways that people learn to create effective design. Further, the ID must be willing to incorporate a number of different tools in the delivery of the material to facilitate learning and improve performance, which is where educational technology comes into play. Finally motivation is important in instructional design. Although, it is true that to learn something effectively, one also has to want to learn it (Ormrod, 2009), it is imperative that an ID creates a well developed learning environment which will address the motivational requirements of learners (Keller, 1999).

This course has provided me with a heighted awareness of learning theory and the importance of a keen understanding of learning theory to the instructional designer. Armed with this awareness, I will be better equipped to design an effective learning environment that is conducive to all kinds of learning styles. In conclusion, I found this course to be very intriguing, rewarding, and relevant to my ongoing growth and development as a professional in the instructional design industry.

References

Gilbert, J., & Swanier, C. (2008). Learning styles: How do they fluctuate? Institute for Learning Styles Journal [Vol. l]. Retrieved from http://www.auburn.edu/~witteje/ilsrj/Journal%20Volumes/Fall%202008%20Volume%201%20PDFs/Learning%20Styles%20How%20do%20They%20Fluctuate.pdf

Keller, J. M. (1999). Using the ARCS motivational process in computer-based instruction and distance education. New Directions for Teaching and Learning (78).

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009), Motivation in Learning [Motion Picture].

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning. Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm

Week 7 - Fitting the Pieces Together

Now that you have a deeper understanding of the different learning theories and learning styles, how has your view on how you learn changed?

During Week 1of our class, we wrote a discussion stemming from a brief overview of learning theories and philosophies from our textbook. The discussion was to describe which theory or philosophy best described how we learned. I don’t believe my view of how I learn has changed much, however I have deeper understanding of the different theories and can see that my learning style can change based on what it is that I am learning. Originally my view of my learning style gravitated toward the Constructivism Theory. According to Etmer & Newby (1993), “Constructivism is a theory that equates learning with creating meaning from experience” (p. 62). I still believe this to be true, however a deeper understanding of Social constructivism, supported my understanding of why this is true for me. Social constructivist scholars emphasize that individuals make meaning through interactions they have with each other and with the environment they live in (Kim, 2001). It is true that I can learn from reading something or listening to a lecture, but I still construct that learning using my previous experiences to support further understanding.

What have you learned about the various learning theories and learning styles over the past weeks that can further explain your own personal learning preferences?

As I continued to study the various learning theories and learning styles, I became more convinced that I learn best using Constructivism, although I may incorporate aspects of other learning styles depending on what I am learning. For example, I recently decided to learn to play the Mandolin. This was very new for me, as I had never played a string instrument prior to picking up the Mandolin. My initial approach one could describe as using tenets from the behaviorism theory, specifically operant conditioning, which Standridge (2001) states is “the rewarding of part of a desired behavior”. Skinner, the creator of operant conditioning concluded from his research that “humans would repeat acts that led to favorable outcomes, and suppress those that produced unfavorable results” Standridge (2001). When learning to play, I would consistently use repetitive actions to produce a desired result, the correct note at the correct time. When I made a mistake, I would stop the behavior that produced the mistake. Consistent practice led to better play. However even in learning to play Mandolin, ultimately I would return to constructivism. I found that I best learned in a group class atmosphere where I could learn from watching others play. In addition, I found using my previous experience at playing piano, supported my ability to read notes and keep time more effectively.

What role does technology play in your learning (i.e., as a way to search for information, to record information, to create, etc.)?

Technology plays an integral role in my learning. It is actually hard to imagine a world without the various technologies we have available to us today, and yet my earlier learning occurred in just that type of world. Distinct from my past schooling, I have not stepped in to a library in over ten years. Just about any piece of information that I am interested in acquiring, can now be found using the internet from my home. Every day I use a computer to enhance my learning. I can keep up on new ideas in my field of interest through blogs, websites, search engines, etc. I can find out what is happening in the lives of some of my friends through social networking sites and email. I can read about what is happening in the world through news websites. If I discover information that I want to keep a record of, I can tag it to find later. Technology has opened up a world of information all available at my finger tips, making the learning possibilities not only endless, but easier to acquire.

References:

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50–71.

Kim, B. (2001). Social constructivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Social_Constructivism

Standridge, M. (2001). Behaviorism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Behaviorism

Connectivism - How my connections facilitate learning - Q & A

How has your network changed the way you learn?

I think as my network increases in size, I am able to incorporate new and often times more innovative ways of learning. As a child, I had a very small network and learned primarily from friends, family, “old” media and traditional education. As I grew older, my network expanded to include more friends as well as more resources in traditional education. However, the advent of the internet and with it all the new technologies available today, my access to learning has grown exponentially. For instance, I could quite easily post a question on my Facebook account, and within 24 hours receive multiple responses providing insight regarding my question. When I think about this, I am in awe. My network has made the acquisition of information, thus learning, available to me almost instantaneously.

Which digital tools best facilitate learning for you?
Since beginning this class, I would say Blogs have become a new favored tool I use to support my learning; and in an effort to obtain the information more effectively, I use Google Reader. I find search engines to be indispensable for acquiring information and have found forums and social networking sites useful when I have specific questions.

How do you gain new knowledge when you have questions?
I guess it depends upon the question. There are some questions I have in which I will turn to family or friends to answer. Questions beyond their preview, I will search the internet and look for a reputable source whether it be a book, forum, journal article or website. Depending on the question, I may find myself at a bookstore looking for books on the subject matter. I don’t really rely on just one source, with the expansion of my network, I have a number of reliable sources to turn to discover answers.

In what ways does your personal learning network support or refute the central tenets of connectivisim?
I find that my learning network lines up quite nicely with the basic principles of Connectivism. These principles as stated in the article by Davis, Demunds & Kelly-Bateman, in our class reading materials are as follows:
• Learning and knowledge rest in diversity of opinions.
• Learning is a process of connecting specialized nodes or information sources.
• Learning may reside in non-human appliances.
• Capacity to know more is more critical than what is currently known.
• Nurturing and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate continual learning.
• Ability to see connections between fields, ideas, and concepts is a core skill.
• Currency (accurate, up-to-date knowledge) is the intent of all connectivist learning activities.
In looking at the first principle learning and knowledge rest in diversity of opinions; I find that one of my favorite ways to learn is to debate an issue with a friend or colleague. I like to take the side of the less favored opinion and debate its validity. I find this quite useful in expanding my knowledge. The third principle, learning may reside in non-human appliances; I assume what is meant here is technology like computers and the internet which I have already written about. The fourth principle, capacity to know more is more critical that what is currently known. Any time I involve anyone in my network to advance my learning I am acting within this tenet, the drive to learn more. These are just a few quick examples of how my learning network supports connectivism.

Connectivism