Technology is reshaping the world’s education system and we as teachers have to be prepared for education in a near future. In particular, the technology to deliver full-length courses online is rapidly becoming a reality. The creation and delivery of courses over the Web will be the driving force for educational change in the 21st century.
The computer will allow the creation of "learn by doing" courses designed by the best and the brightest experts in any given field. Quality universities will put their names on these courses, and companies will create them, guaranteeing employment to those who pass them. This will create tremendous change for everyone involved in the education system.
Teachers’ new role
The teaching of traditional academic subjects, first in high school and later in elementary school, will be increasingly done via online courses. Eventually school libraries will contain hundreds of these courses. Teachers will be left to provide things that technology cannot: personal one-on-one tutoring; teaching kids how to work in a group to accomplish something; and teaching crucial interpersonal relationship skills.
Initially teachers may feel disenfranchised by this. But an important opportunity will emerge for teaching social skills that students desperately need, and teachers will understand they need to be the ones to fill this role. Today there is a push to measure teachers by their students’ test scores. Tomorrow, teachers will be judged by more meaningful measures as we begin to value them for their human qualities.
Not only will teachers act much more as social workers or guidance counselors in the future, they will also lead courses that explicitly focus on developing social and interpersonal skills. The teacher will be an advisor to the team, or a guide on an expedition. Right now teachers are authority figures. Once teachers move out of that role, they will eliminate a roadblock that prevents them from connecting with the students who need the most guidance.
Primary education
One of the biggest problems we have in elementary school is the amount of time kids are forced to sit still. Sitting still is so hard, and it’s the last thing young children want to do. I’d rather see kids spending more time playing than doing academics. While I think there is a valuable lesson in teaching a seven-year-old to sit down and focus on a task, that task shouldn’t be doing 1,400 multiplication tables.
Elementary school should be simply about reading, writing and arithmetic, about acquiring good work habits, and perhaps most importantly, about instilling a love of learning in each child. A lot of what in today’s school system is considered extracurricular, like putting out a school paper, ought to be the curriculum. Students learn more that way than any other way.
Schools and their new role
We are moving in a direction where everybody is staring at a computer or a television all day and all night and not interacting with other people in a meaningful way. I think the schools will have to be the counterbalance to this trend, to actively provide opportunities for social interaction and to teach the skills required for successful interaction with other individuals. Part of the job of the school must be to help students learn how to work together and to be a functional part of society.
The school itself will evolve into a sort of student or community center, where kids are engaged in a variety of activities and projects. There will be a tremendous range of activities, but they will not be as purely academic as they currently are. When students are not participating in these activities, they will be taking online courses at home, or if the supervision there doesn’t allow it, at school.
Schools will become much more connected to the community around them as activities bring students more and more into contact with their community. They will also become more connected to local businesses, as students have the opportunity to engage in real-world jobs with local employers. The school will become the center of the community in a much deeper way than it currently is.
Curriculum centralization and instructional development
The advent of ubiquitous networking technology will lead to the centralization of key functions in the education system, just as it has in the business world.
First, the delivery of education via online courses will change the entire landscape of course development and control of the curriculum. Each academic field will supply its experts to help create the courses in that field. Consortiums of academic experts, educational technologists, and businesses will work to develop, update, refine and improve these courses. As a society, we will be able to realize tremendous efficiencies by developing these top-quality courses one time only. We will also realize a tremendous improvement in course quality control. All students will be able to select from a wide range of top-quality courses in any subject that interests them.
Second, the fiction of local control of education will become evident and a panel of education experts, rather than local groups of well-meaning, but uninformed parents, will develop the curriculum. There will be no point of local school boards arguing over which courses should or should not be offered, when every imaginable expert-built course is available. A central body will assume control over the curriculum represented by the online courses.
Third, the advance of technology, in particular live videoconferencing, will lead to the creation of a centralized pool of tutors for various subjects. Just as today’s companies have centralized phone centers where customers can call in for service, we will see the creation of one-on-one tutoring services provided via live videoconferencing. Having trouble with some calculus problems? Just connect to the calculus tutoring center for a face-to-face session with an expert tutor. These learning service centers will provide students across the world, no matter what community they live in, with access to the best coaches available.
Conclusion
The primary driver of change in our 21st century education system will be the creation of online courses that will remove the responsibilities for teaching academic subjects from teachers. Instead, teachers and schools will focus on combating the increasing social isolation that our society will face. Schools will become activity centers where students will work in groups on real-world projects, go on trips, and participate in the community. While students may also use schools as locations to engage in online course work, this course work will be just as available at home. The advent of online courses and associated networking technology will also lead to a centralization of course and curriculum development.
sábado, 14 de noviembre de 2009
sábado, 24 de octubre de 2009
Managing and moderating the online learning environment
Task 4.2.3. Managing and moderating the online learning environment
The 30 most important factors in managing and moderating the online learning environment in order of priority (the most important first)
1. Set clear objectives for the session.
2. Be prepared, well in advance.
3. Be objective.
4. Value participation.
5. Create a friendly, social environment.
6. Become familiar and proficient at the use of the technology – practice in advance.
7. Be prepared for technology failure – have a backup option (email, fax or telephone).
8. Prepare new students in advance and allow them to set the pace.
9. Provide an overview of timetable, procedures, expectations and decision-making norms where appropriate.
10. Encourage participants to introduce themselves.
11. Take note of students who don’t participate during the first session and contact them privately to determine why.
12. Enable students to experience the moderator role for themselves.
13. Create opportunities to sustain discussions and interactions.
14. Create a policy on communications.
15. Try different communication styles
16. Promote healthy and respectful social interactions.
17. Encourage participation through use of questions and probing.
18. Facilitate discussion – present conflicting opinions, or ask open-ended questions.
19. Ask a lot of questions, and review answers or comments providing summary comment.
20. Model appropriate online behaviour.
21. Model online intellectual discourse.
22. Contribute your own special knowledge in a collaborative fashion – don’t lecture.
23. Be responsive – remedy issues as they arise, help participants with information overload.
24. Make sure participants are comfortable with the system – hold practice sessions.
25. Build relevancy into the materials.
26. Recognize and deal with appropriate and inappropriate student input.
27. Accept ‘lurkers’, reluctant or timid students – help to draw them comfortably into discussion.
28. Don’t rely on offline materials – bring them into the online environment for discussion.
29. Be flexible in schedule to accommodate student direction, need and interest.
30. Maintain a non-authoritarian style.
References
LaBonte, Randy et al (2003) Moderating Tips for Synchronous Learning Using Virtual Classroom Technologies. Odyssey Learning Systems Inc. Retrieved from
http://odysseylearn.com/Resrce/text/e-Moderating%20tips.pdf [Available as an Eresource]
The 30 most important factors in managing and moderating the online learning environment in order of priority (the most important first)
1. Set clear objectives for the session.
2. Be prepared, well in advance.
3. Be objective.
4. Value participation.
5. Create a friendly, social environment.
6. Become familiar and proficient at the use of the technology – practice in advance.
7. Be prepared for technology failure – have a backup option (email, fax or telephone).
8. Prepare new students in advance and allow them to set the pace.
9. Provide an overview of timetable, procedures, expectations and decision-making norms where appropriate.
10. Encourage participants to introduce themselves.
11. Take note of students who don’t participate during the first session and contact them privately to determine why.
12. Enable students to experience the moderator role for themselves.
13. Create opportunities to sustain discussions and interactions.
14. Create a policy on communications.
15. Try different communication styles
16. Promote healthy and respectful social interactions.
17. Encourage participation through use of questions and probing.
18. Facilitate discussion – present conflicting opinions, or ask open-ended questions.
19. Ask a lot of questions, and review answers or comments providing summary comment.
20. Model appropriate online behaviour.
21. Model online intellectual discourse.
22. Contribute your own special knowledge in a collaborative fashion – don’t lecture.
23. Be responsive – remedy issues as they arise, help participants with information overload.
24. Make sure participants are comfortable with the system – hold practice sessions.
25. Build relevancy into the materials.
26. Recognize and deal with appropriate and inappropriate student input.
27. Accept ‘lurkers’, reluctant or timid students – help to draw them comfortably into discussion.
28. Don’t rely on offline materials – bring them into the online environment for discussion.
29. Be flexible in schedule to accommodate student direction, need and interest.
30. Maintain a non-authoritarian style.
References
LaBonte, Randy et al (2003) Moderating Tips for Synchronous Learning Using Virtual Classroom Technologies. Odyssey Learning Systems Inc. Retrieved from
http://odysseylearn.com/Resrce/text/e-Moderating%20tips.pdf [Available as an Eresource]
How to humanize an online language learning environment
Task 4.2.6 Assessed Written Assignment 4
The Right Environment For More Humanized Online Language Learning
The Web offers online language students the perfect technology, but sometimes not the right environment for more humanized online learning where learners can be uniquely identified, content can be specifically presented, and progress can be individually monitored, supported, and assessed. Nevertheless, technologically speaking, language teachers are making rapid progress towards more humanized learning on the Web using adaptive technology. However, missing still is a whole-person understanding of how individuals learn online (Dotson, 2003), more than just how they process, build, and store knowledge. Cognitive solutions designed for the classroom solutions and facilitated by the teachers are often not enough to meet the individual needs of online language learners.
It is important to offer an alternative perspective about language learning on the Web that supports individual differences from a more personal level. There must be more discussion among teachers on issues such as the sources for individual language learning differences, specific reasons why some learners may be more self-directed or self-motivated than others, and design guidelines that have to do with the dominant influence of emotions, intentions, and on social aspects on online language learning. These insights from teachers can offer simple ways to enhance and evaluate contemporary online instructional designs so that they support personalized needs and instill the right habits for improved online language learning and performance.
Teachers who deal with problems or issues usually associated with online language learning environment should aim at seeking new perspectives for understanding individual differences and personalized language learning on the Web, because after years of research focused on primarily cognitive models, experience has shown that these solutions have often proved unpredictable and unstable, especially for online language learning (Reeves, 1993). What is needed is more reliable theoretical foundations that look at the person as a whole in order to set and accomplish personal short and long term challenging goals that maximize the students’ efforts to innovate and reach personal goals and that help them commit to make bigger efforts to discover, elaborate, and build new knowledge and meaning in terms of language learning.
Learners’ needs, desires, and intentions as well as emotions and feelings are attributes that are more stable over different online learning situations. Consequently, online language teachers should realize that conventional cognitive solutions are not enough. They must discover the need to increase their focus on the affective factors that influence language learning. In this context, the purpose should be to examine higher-order human characteristics and psychological influences on learning since this perspective leads to an examination of the dominant impact of emotions and intentions on the cognitive process of the students (Hargreaves, 2009). Online instructors should therefore take more into account vital relationships between key psychological factors (affective, cognitive, and social) which influence language learning differently; also critical links between online language learning environments, learning differences and learning ability, and supportive online language learning environments that match individual learning differences.
Today's teachers and online language environments designers alike must seek more sophisticated learning theories based on proven research showing how the human brain works and understand how individuals really learn because this will lead the way for personalizing or adapting online language learning environments and instruction. An important consideration in humanizing online learning is determining dominant or higher-level sources for individual learning differences. This involves understanding how the brain's emotional system influences cognitive processes or how different learners think and learn (Reeves, 1993). Much of the present understanding on individual learning differences remains focused on cognitive interests and mechanisms for information processing and knowledge building, but consideration of an important piece of learning is missing, since cognitive solutions often overlook fundamental whole-person learning needs such as the dominant influence of emotions and intentions that is crucial for self-directed and self-motivated language learning. The cognitive aspect generally supports traditional online teacher roles where an online instructor manages emotions, intentions and social issues.
Traditional cognitive classroom solutions are not always viable solutions for the language learner. Online learners need to want and intend to become more self-supporting and self-directing learners, independent of the instructor (Reeves, 1993). There are many students who come from classroom environments that are not equipped to handle online language learning environments. Online teachers must recognize the online learning ability gap and provide solutions that consider the whole-person perspective so that they can really help the online language student to gradually move to a more successful, self-directed online language learning. It is a pity to see that still a good number of today's language learners are conditioned to rely on their online instructors. Schools require a more sophisticated understanding of the student as a human being and his/her psychological characteristics of learning to change this conditioning (Weiss, 2002). Online language learning must be transformed into learning the helps learners want to improve their performance and negotiate constant improvement and change, independently, passionately and productively. More humanized, personalized learning is a step that has to be taken in this direction. As schools decide on next-generation e-learning alternatives, they need to first understand the dominant power of emotions and intentions on language learning, and second, seek humanized solutions that use this understanding to revolutionize the presentation of language learning (Weiss, 2002).
As a conclusion, it is important that online teachers come up with suggestions that contribute to more successful online language learning and a greater understanding about fundamental learning differences influenced by human affective influences. When teachers design an online course with only a universal type of learner in mind, all with similar emotions and intentions, they unintentionally set learners up for frustration and possible failure. If teachers become more serious about providing good online language instruction for learners, they must provide multiple ways to provide instruction and environments so that all learners will want to learn on the Web and continue to have opportunities for success. The benefits of humanizing online language learning to individual differences address important human issues such as frustration, lack of confidence, mistakes, impatience, reactions, and boredom. Instructional design for online language learning should address the unique sources for learning differences from a whole-person perspective. Online language sessions should emulate the instructor's experienced, intuitive ability to recognize and respond to how individuals learn differently, foster interest, value, as well as encourage more self-motivated, self-directed learning and a more humanized solution to individual differences.
References
Dotson, Tim (2003). Why Johnny Won't Post. Converge Online. Retrieved from
http://www.centerdigitaled.com/converge/?pg=magstory&id=65480 [Available as
an E-resource]
Hargreaves, S. (2009). Humanizing language teaching. Retrieved October 20, 2009, from http://www.hltmag.co.uk/oct09/index.htm
Palloff, Rena and Pratt, Keith (2007). Building Online Learning Communities, Wiley.
Reeves, T. (1993). Pseudoscience In Computer-Based Instruction: The Case of Learner Control Research, Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 39-46.
Snow, R., & Farr, M. (1987), Cognitive-Conative-Affective Processes in Aptitude, Learning, and Instructi: Conative and Affective Process Analyses. Vol. 3, pp. 1-10, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum Associates.
Weiss, R. (2002). Humanizing the online classroom. Retrieved October 21, 2009, from http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/101523966/abstract
The Right Environment For More Humanized Online Language Learning
The Web offers online language students the perfect technology, but sometimes not the right environment for more humanized online learning where learners can be uniquely identified, content can be specifically presented, and progress can be individually monitored, supported, and assessed. Nevertheless, technologically speaking, language teachers are making rapid progress towards more humanized learning on the Web using adaptive technology. However, missing still is a whole-person understanding of how individuals learn online (Dotson, 2003), more than just how they process, build, and store knowledge. Cognitive solutions designed for the classroom solutions and facilitated by the teachers are often not enough to meet the individual needs of online language learners.
It is important to offer an alternative perspective about language learning on the Web that supports individual differences from a more personal level. There must be more discussion among teachers on issues such as the sources for individual language learning differences, specific reasons why some learners may be more self-directed or self-motivated than others, and design guidelines that have to do with the dominant influence of emotions, intentions, and on social aspects on online language learning. These insights from teachers can offer simple ways to enhance and evaluate contemporary online instructional designs so that they support personalized needs and instill the right habits for improved online language learning and performance.
Teachers who deal with problems or issues usually associated with online language learning environment should aim at seeking new perspectives for understanding individual differences and personalized language learning on the Web, because after years of research focused on primarily cognitive models, experience has shown that these solutions have often proved unpredictable and unstable, especially for online language learning (Reeves, 1993). What is needed is more reliable theoretical foundations that look at the person as a whole in order to set and accomplish personal short and long term challenging goals that maximize the students’ efforts to innovate and reach personal goals and that help them commit to make bigger efforts to discover, elaborate, and build new knowledge and meaning in terms of language learning.
Learners’ needs, desires, and intentions as well as emotions and feelings are attributes that are more stable over different online learning situations. Consequently, online language teachers should realize that conventional cognitive solutions are not enough. They must discover the need to increase their focus on the affective factors that influence language learning. In this context, the purpose should be to examine higher-order human characteristics and psychological influences on learning since this perspective leads to an examination of the dominant impact of emotions and intentions on the cognitive process of the students (Hargreaves, 2009). Online instructors should therefore take more into account vital relationships between key psychological factors (affective, cognitive, and social) which influence language learning differently; also critical links between online language learning environments, learning differences and learning ability, and supportive online language learning environments that match individual learning differences.
Today's teachers and online language environments designers alike must seek more sophisticated learning theories based on proven research showing how the human brain works and understand how individuals really learn because this will lead the way for personalizing or adapting online language learning environments and instruction. An important consideration in humanizing online learning is determining dominant or higher-level sources for individual learning differences. This involves understanding how the brain's emotional system influences cognitive processes or how different learners think and learn (Reeves, 1993). Much of the present understanding on individual learning differences remains focused on cognitive interests and mechanisms for information processing and knowledge building, but consideration of an important piece of learning is missing, since cognitive solutions often overlook fundamental whole-person learning needs such as the dominant influence of emotions and intentions that is crucial for self-directed and self-motivated language learning. The cognitive aspect generally supports traditional online teacher roles where an online instructor manages emotions, intentions and social issues.
Traditional cognitive classroom solutions are not always viable solutions for the language learner. Online learners need to want and intend to become more self-supporting and self-directing learners, independent of the instructor (Reeves, 1993). There are many students who come from classroom environments that are not equipped to handle online language learning environments. Online teachers must recognize the online learning ability gap and provide solutions that consider the whole-person perspective so that they can really help the online language student to gradually move to a more successful, self-directed online language learning. It is a pity to see that still a good number of today's language learners are conditioned to rely on their online instructors. Schools require a more sophisticated understanding of the student as a human being and his/her psychological characteristics of learning to change this conditioning (Weiss, 2002). Online language learning must be transformed into learning the helps learners want to improve their performance and negotiate constant improvement and change, independently, passionately and productively. More humanized, personalized learning is a step that has to be taken in this direction. As schools decide on next-generation e-learning alternatives, they need to first understand the dominant power of emotions and intentions on language learning, and second, seek humanized solutions that use this understanding to revolutionize the presentation of language learning (Weiss, 2002).
As a conclusion, it is important that online teachers come up with suggestions that contribute to more successful online language learning and a greater understanding about fundamental learning differences influenced by human affective influences. When teachers design an online course with only a universal type of learner in mind, all with similar emotions and intentions, they unintentionally set learners up for frustration and possible failure. If teachers become more serious about providing good online language instruction for learners, they must provide multiple ways to provide instruction and environments so that all learners will want to learn on the Web and continue to have opportunities for success. The benefits of humanizing online language learning to individual differences address important human issues such as frustration, lack of confidence, mistakes, impatience, reactions, and boredom. Instructional design for online language learning should address the unique sources for learning differences from a whole-person perspective. Online language sessions should emulate the instructor's experienced, intuitive ability to recognize and respond to how individuals learn differently, foster interest, value, as well as encourage more self-motivated, self-directed learning and a more humanized solution to individual differences.
References
Dotson, Tim (2003). Why Johnny Won't Post. Converge Online. Retrieved from
http://www.centerdigitaled.com/converge/?pg=magstory&id=65480 [Available as
an E-resource]
Hargreaves, S. (2009). Humanizing language teaching. Retrieved October 20, 2009, from http://www.hltmag.co.uk/oct09/index.htm
Palloff, Rena and Pratt, Keith (2007). Building Online Learning Communities, Wiley.
Reeves, T. (1993). Pseudoscience In Computer-Based Instruction: The Case of Learner Control Research, Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 39-46.
Snow, R., & Farr, M. (1987), Cognitive-Conative-Affective Processes in Aptitude, Learning, and Instructi: Conative and Affective Process Analyses. Vol. 3, pp. 1-10, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum Associates.
Weiss, R. (2002). Humanizing the online classroom. Retrieved October 21, 2009, from http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/101523966/abstract
Synchronous and asynchronous communication
Taking into account that synchronous communication is simply communication that happens at the same time -a casual conversation, a phone call, a discussion session, exchanges in an AOL chatroom- and that asynchronous communication, on the other hand, is communication that can wait in which no reply is required at that moment - a voice mail message, a mail to a friend, or comments on a paper (Haefner, 2000), I think that the best thing to do is to look for a balance or mix of real-time, synchronous interaction and asynchronous communication by offering teachers better guidance for the appropriate use of computer-mediated communication, so that it is easier for them to decide how to balance synchronous and asynchronous modes in their online classes.
Many teachers nowadays are very committed to using digital technology in the classroom and in my opinion, the most appropriate kind of virtual education for them is one that includes both synchronous and asynchronous information exchange. In this way, students are given different and more varied opportunities to express themselves, share with others, and produce new knowledge. So, balancing synchronous and asynchronous exchanges in today’s classroom is key for the educational community to succeed in modern education.
It is true that the great advantage of an asynchronous class is that students can do the work at any time of the day, but computer-mediated communication is not for everyone and that convenience and flexibility carries liabilities such as a sense of disconnection and isolation for some students. What teachers need to do is to find ways to energize and motívate their students trying to maintain the humor, the energy, and the excitement of the real life classroom.
The profile of the online learner population is changing and this change in profile poses considerable pedagogical challenges that can be addressed through a better understanding of the emerging online learner who is someone who has a strong academic self-concept; is competent in the use of online learning technologies, particularly communication and collaborative technologies; understands, values, and engages in social interaction and collaborative learning; possesses strong interpersonal and communication skills; and is self-directed. In order to support and promote these characteristics and skills more effectively, the online course developer, instructor, or teacher should focus on designing online learning environments that support both synchronous and asynchronous communication. Environments that help engage learners in online learning activities that require collaboration, communication, social interaction, reflection, evaluation, and self-directed learning.
References
Haefner, Joel. (2000). The Importance of Being Synchronous. Academic.Writing.
Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/aw/teaching/haefner2000.htm [Available
as an E-resource]
LaBonte, Randy et al (2003) Moderating Tips for Synchronous Learning Using
Virtual Classroom Technologies. Odyssey Learning Systems Inc. Retrieved from
http://odysseylearn.com/Resrce/text/e-Moderating%20tips.pdf [Available as an
Eresource]
Palloff, Rena and Pratt, Keith (2007). Building Online Learning Communities, Wiley.
Many teachers nowadays are very committed to using digital technology in the classroom and in my opinion, the most appropriate kind of virtual education for them is one that includes both synchronous and asynchronous information exchange. In this way, students are given different and more varied opportunities to express themselves, share with others, and produce new knowledge. So, balancing synchronous and asynchronous exchanges in today’s classroom is key for the educational community to succeed in modern education.
It is true that the great advantage of an asynchronous class is that students can do the work at any time of the day, but computer-mediated communication is not for everyone and that convenience and flexibility carries liabilities such as a sense of disconnection and isolation for some students. What teachers need to do is to find ways to energize and motívate their students trying to maintain the humor, the energy, and the excitement of the real life classroom.
The profile of the online learner population is changing and this change in profile poses considerable pedagogical challenges that can be addressed through a better understanding of the emerging online learner who is someone who has a strong academic self-concept; is competent in the use of online learning technologies, particularly communication and collaborative technologies; understands, values, and engages in social interaction and collaborative learning; possesses strong interpersonal and communication skills; and is self-directed. In order to support and promote these characteristics and skills more effectively, the online course developer, instructor, or teacher should focus on designing online learning environments that support both synchronous and asynchronous communication. Environments that help engage learners in online learning activities that require collaboration, communication, social interaction, reflection, evaluation, and self-directed learning.
References
Haefner, Joel. (2000). The Importance of Being Synchronous. Academic.Writing.
Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/aw/teaching/haefner2000.htm [Available
as an E-resource]
LaBonte, Randy et al (2003) Moderating Tips for Synchronous Learning Using
Virtual Classroom Technologies. Odyssey Learning Systems Inc. Retrieved from
http://odysseylearn.com/Resrce/text/e-Moderating%20tips.pdf [Available as an
Eresource]
Palloff, Rena and Pratt, Keith (2007). Building Online Learning Communities, Wiley.
miércoles, 16 de septiembre de 2009
The Psychology of Learning Environments
First, I will analyze our Moodle course management system according to the model of usability criteria.
Learnability: The Moodle course management system has a good capability that enables both teachers at the university as well as students to learn how to use it. This user interface can be learned quickly and effectively. Moodle is easy to learn because it has been designed to be easy to use based on students’ psychological properties, and because it is familiar, which means that it follows standards and its design follows students’ real world experience.
Efficiency: The rate or speed at which Moodle enables students to accurately and successfully complete a task is excellent. Both the consistent response time and the fast response time are good. Experienced Moodle users can accomplish certain tasks easy once they have learned the platform design.
Memorability: Moodle users can remember how to use the management system quickly and accurately. Moodle has incorporated a design that enables users to quickly recall what they have learned and also enables them to easily go around the platform the next time they use it. Moodle has a high learnability and this makes it even higher in memorability..
Errors: Moodle has few errors if any and this indicates that it is difficult for users to cause errors, and that even if errors occur, they are easily recovered. It seems to me that the people behind Moodle know that it is crucial to minimize errors in the management system. It is clear that confusing button layouts and error messages have been reevaluated making it difficult for us users to make a mistake. Moodle designer should make sure that if an error does occur, the platform design should allow the user to recover from the error without assistance, as much as possible.
Satisfaction: The degree of enjoyment that we Moodle users experience when visiting it is high. This usability characteristic is especially important for us who are willing to learn but at the same time want to be in some way relaxed and if possible entertained. We users who visit Moodle want to spend time learning and enjoying the learning experience, so we measure satisfaction in terms of enjoyment value as well as the speed at which we can accomplish our tasks. I do hope that to keep users coming back to Moodle, the designers keep on increasing satisfaction levels so that the platform is enjoyable and offers an active and rich learning experience.
After choosing a familiar physical learning environment and a virtual learning environment, I analyzed and compared them according to the 4 cognitive determinants of environmental preference.
Environments
A. My school’s library
(Familiar physical learning environment)
B. Virtual Sabana
(virtual learning environment)
Cognitive determinants of environmental preference.
Coherence (The ease with which a setting can be organized cognitively)
A. This physical learning environment frequently offers difficulty, hardship, or effort to some users, especially young learners as not all the books, magazines and other resources are arranged into a purposeful, sequential or spatial order or structure.
B. This virtual learning environment is free from difficulty as we users can work with many people at the same like in a virtual office. It has been created with an efficient electronic setting. This well-organized virtual workspace helps to make the flow of our cognitive work smoother and easier. We are more efficient in completing our intellectual work in a systematic way like this one.
Complexity (The perceived capacity of the setting to occupy interest and stimulate activity)
A. Basically there are two aspects which do not make this setting as interesting and stimulating to students as virtual environments:
Hours of Operation:The library is open only a set number of hoursTime restrictions:Checked-out materials must be returned
B. It has a good capacity to occupy students’ interest and stimulate their activity because it offers up-to-date news about subjects and topics in which students are interested; it is convenient as it can be accessed through a wireless device; there is a diversity of information and it offers the possibility to download and edit text and images and requires minimal computer skills.
Legibility (Perceived ease of use)
A. The traditional physical learning environment such as the school library in this case, is limited by storage space; does not have the potential to store much more information like a digital one, simply because digital information require very little physical space to contain them. The cost of maintaining a digital library is much lower than that of a traditional library. A traditional library must spend large sums of money paying for staff, book maintenance, rent, and additional books. Some users also find more difficulty, hardship, and effort to use it.
B. This virtual learning environment offers ease of use since the users feel confidence about the system security and because the users become more familiar with electronic resources. Enjoyment needs are also better met by users than those provided at the physical leaning environment.
Mystery (The perception that entering the setting would lead to increased learning, interaction, or interest)
A. As soon as users enter this physical learning environment, they already know what they can expect: books in shelves, encyclopedias, dictionaries, thesaurus, grammar books, etc. There are not many options for interaction and students’ interest decreases.
B. Entering the Virtual Sabana virtual learning environment leads users to increased learning, interaction, and interest as they find more options for different learning styles and collaborative work; students can interact with others and share experiences to gain more knowledge about a common topic or students can work on their own and use the tools available to carry out their tasks successfully and fully motivated.
Learnability: The Moodle course management system has a good capability that enables both teachers at the university as well as students to learn how to use it. This user interface can be learned quickly and effectively. Moodle is easy to learn because it has been designed to be easy to use based on students’ psychological properties, and because it is familiar, which means that it follows standards and its design follows students’ real world experience.
Efficiency: The rate or speed at which Moodle enables students to accurately and successfully complete a task is excellent. Both the consistent response time and the fast response time are good. Experienced Moodle users can accomplish certain tasks easy once they have learned the platform design.
Memorability: Moodle users can remember how to use the management system quickly and accurately. Moodle has incorporated a design that enables users to quickly recall what they have learned and also enables them to easily go around the platform the next time they use it. Moodle has a high learnability and this makes it even higher in memorability..
Errors: Moodle has few errors if any and this indicates that it is difficult for users to cause errors, and that even if errors occur, they are easily recovered. It seems to me that the people behind Moodle know that it is crucial to minimize errors in the management system. It is clear that confusing button layouts and error messages have been reevaluated making it difficult for us users to make a mistake. Moodle designer should make sure that if an error does occur, the platform design should allow the user to recover from the error without assistance, as much as possible.
Satisfaction: The degree of enjoyment that we Moodle users experience when visiting it is high. This usability characteristic is especially important for us who are willing to learn but at the same time want to be in some way relaxed and if possible entertained. We users who visit Moodle want to spend time learning and enjoying the learning experience, so we measure satisfaction in terms of enjoyment value as well as the speed at which we can accomplish our tasks. I do hope that to keep users coming back to Moodle, the designers keep on increasing satisfaction levels so that the platform is enjoyable and offers an active and rich learning experience.
After choosing a familiar physical learning environment and a virtual learning environment, I analyzed and compared them according to the 4 cognitive determinants of environmental preference.
Environments
A. My school’s library
(Familiar physical learning environment)
B. Virtual Sabana
(virtual learning environment)
Cognitive determinants of environmental preference.
Coherence (The ease with which a setting can be organized cognitively)
A. This physical learning environment frequently offers difficulty, hardship, or effort to some users, especially young learners as not all the books, magazines and other resources are arranged into a purposeful, sequential or spatial order or structure.
B. This virtual learning environment is free from difficulty as we users can work with many people at the same like in a virtual office. It has been created with an efficient electronic setting. This well-organized virtual workspace helps to make the flow of our cognitive work smoother and easier. We are more efficient in completing our intellectual work in a systematic way like this one.
Complexity (The perceived capacity of the setting to occupy interest and stimulate activity)
A. Basically there are two aspects which do not make this setting as interesting and stimulating to students as virtual environments:
Hours of Operation:The library is open only a set number of hoursTime restrictions:Checked-out materials must be returned
B. It has a good capacity to occupy students’ interest and stimulate their activity because it offers up-to-date news about subjects and topics in which students are interested; it is convenient as it can be accessed through a wireless device; there is a diversity of information and it offers the possibility to download and edit text and images and requires minimal computer skills.
Legibility (Perceived ease of use)
A. The traditional physical learning environment such as the school library in this case, is limited by storage space; does not have the potential to store much more information like a digital one, simply because digital information require very little physical space to contain them. The cost of maintaining a digital library is much lower than that of a traditional library. A traditional library must spend large sums of money paying for staff, book maintenance, rent, and additional books. Some users also find more difficulty, hardship, and effort to use it.
B. This virtual learning environment offers ease of use since the users feel confidence about the system security and because the users become more familiar with electronic resources. Enjoyment needs are also better met by users than those provided at the physical leaning environment.
Mystery (The perception that entering the setting would lead to increased learning, interaction, or interest)
A. As soon as users enter this physical learning environment, they already know what they can expect: books in shelves, encyclopedias, dictionaries, thesaurus, grammar books, etc. There are not many options for interaction and students’ interest decreases.
B. Entering the Virtual Sabana virtual learning environment leads users to increased learning, interaction, and interest as they find more options for different learning styles and collaborative work; students can interact with others and share experiences to gain more knowledge about a common topic or students can work on their own and use the tools available to carry out their tasks successfully and fully motivated.
Categories of E-learning
Here is my relation to each of the 7 categories of e-learning to my personal experience. I have been involved in educational experiences within the following categories:
Courses (as a student): Once I had the chance to take an online course called Desktop Computing. This online e-learning course covered common desktop computer applications such as Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Access and Outlook. What I liked about it is that I learned about operating systems, the Internet, and much more. The course included features such as flash-based instructional demonstrations; instructional audio with graphics; exercises that allowed me to practice in the actual application being studied, sample files that included sample documents, application files, programs, and programming code that enabled me to practice with these files, enhancing my learning experience. The course was also challenging because it had a variety of question formats, including multi-step simulations, true/false, multiple choice, and fill-in-the-blank exercises.
Informal learning (as a teacher): My students need for information has taken me to encourage them to search for the information they need using search engines and personal knowledge management tools, especially blogs. I have used these tools with my students at the school and I have encourage them to use them at home where they learn a lot on their own. This has helped students to discover by themselves how to do homework and carry out school projects through informal learning by means of observing different web sites and using tools such as e-mail and blogs to ask questions to other classmates or even experts in some fields that are available in the Web.
Blended learning (as a student): The blended learning courses that I have taken in the Master’s program like the SOLRC I we took last semester provided me an excellent opportunity for learning about language resource centers by means of combining both classroom and e-learning sessions as this blended learning involved face-to-face sessions and online learning. This method made it easier for me to learn more about this subject because of the increased discussions and information reviews that we had to do outside the classroom. The instructors that we had in this blended course encouraged us to socialize through their direction and facilitation and they used the best of the Studium resource center with the best of online learning.
Communities (as a teacher): There is no need to separate students in time and space when we use e-learning resources; it can be overcome by building environments where students talk to one another, build relationships, and teach one another. This I have been trying to do with grade seven students to whom I am teaching religion. I have tried one key idea that maybe has been overlooked in the design and implementation of many e-learning programs, and it is that learning is fundamentally both social and experiential. In this case I have used wikis and blogs and taken into account the context of the learning and all of the elements that comprise the experience around the major religions of the world, and I have encouraged my students to work collaboratively online looking for real knowledge about this topic and creating communities of learning where to my surprise, high levels of student satisfaction have been generated.
Knowledge management (neither as a student nor as a teacher)
Learning networks (as a teacher colleague): In the department where I work, we have created a learning community around a particular goal which is the preparation for international exams such as TOEFL and the TKT (Teacher Knowledge Test). A group of English teachers and I planned and developed a network in order to study and share experiences related to teaching English as a second language with a challenge in mind: taking the TKT exam as a result of this learning network. The use of this colleague learning network allowed us to learn more about our teaching field and to obtain good results in this international test for teachers.
Work-based learning (Neither as a student nor as a teacher): Our school has considered the possibility of providing more rigorous and expansive work-based learning opportunities to students. Work-based learning is one option that the school is considering for providing meaningful and engaged learning for them, but to provide work-based learning experiences for all students, we know that our teachers first must develop a better understanding of work-based learning options.
jueves, 10 de septiembre de 2009
Task 2.2.4: The Role of Community
The concept of community itself is important. A community such as the one in which I work, is a group of interacting people who share an educational environment. The same applies to the NLE community in which we have been sharing knowledge about new learning environments interacting meaningfully. There are some conditions that a human community like ours has that affect the identity of the members and their degree of cohesiveness; aspects such as personality, personal beliefs, resources, preferences and needs, among others. In our NLE environment, we are a group of learners with a common purpose which is to learn more about new options we have as educators related to learning environments; we share knowledge and values using different ways such as virtual forums, wikis, blogs, and other technological tools guided by a community leader who takes us to reach the goals that have been set.
The community as a context for learning, whether physical or virtual is that in which its members share experiences meaningfully helping others to acquire more knowledge under the leadership of someone who, like in our NLE community, makes sure everyone participates and is given the chance to contribute and receive feedback. In our case, this happens within a virtual learning environment where we find a set of teaching and learning tools that help us enhance our students’ learning experience by including computers and the Internet in their learning process. Some components that we have been included in our NLE community are: curriculum mapping (the curriculum has been broken into sections or modules that can be assigned and assessed), student tracking, online support, electronic communication (e-mail, threaded discussions, chat, wiki and blog publishing), and Internet links to outside curriculum resources.
Collaborative work and the presence of coalescence are also important issues related to the role of community. Socializing, meeting people, playing around, sharing jokes, stories and just taking interest in each other are just a few examples. Communities foster their members to work together as we do in our NLE online community in which we have a sense of group. We build our team keeping in touch and working on projects together using different ways to communicate just the way other community groups such as sport teams, school groups and others do by using online forums for information and discussion, which help the groups together. Our NLE community is very important to all of us who share educational interests and issues for the benefit of our learners who form the nucleus of our online community.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)
