POI Week 2 Responses

OK, here are the week 2 questions with my responses:

1.  How do you plan to design your online course to encourage free flow ideas and requests for clarification--discussion forums, email, chatrooms, team activities, other?

I generally make use the discussion boards for clarification.  I also generally set up a specific discussion board for clarification, and I will also set up one for general topics or off topics.  I call it the Student Union or Watercooler. I generally let the students handle the topics in there and let it be "their space."  I use synchronous chat for office hours.  I have it open at certain times and students can come in and ask questions as needed.  I use Facebook for the same thing.

2.  What thoughts do you have about timing access to different components of the lesson(s)--one-time dump, progressive access, access tied to specific assignments, allow students to work ahead or go back to catch up, other?

I've done both, and it generally depends on the content.  Some content lends itself to work-at-your-own-pace, and some doesn't.

So there you have it.  Nothing earth-shattering, but my opinions nonetheless.  I'm actually kind of bummed about how this course is going.  Not a whole lot of discussion going on, and everyone is waiting until the last minute to post and that makes it difficult for anyone to respond.

Yeah, you know what I'm talking about . . .

(POI) Week one responses to me

See my previous post to see what my week one response was.

Here is what classmate N. responded:

I completely agree with you and I do not see why grading participation is so important. Obviously the ultimate goal is to teach the topics covered in a course effectively by enforcing critical thinking. As long as a student demonstrates that he/she has learned the topics introduced through his/her performace in exams and assignments why we should force an individual to participate in a discussion by assigning grades to participation.  I think having a forum to exchange ideas is helpful but a lot of people can learn without participating or  by passive participation (by just reading the posts that interests him/her) in a discussion group. My approach would be to provide all the learning tools available to the students and let them choose the most effective method themselves. As instructors our job is to measure the outcome.

To that, classmate J. responded:

I don't see that there are any secrets to the educational process.  Students must interact with certain amounts of information in order to make it their own.  Participation has been proven to improve the levels of comprehension and absorption for the kinds of things most graduate students are expected to learn in their programs.  Yes there are some things that we can learn the first time we see or hear them, but most things take time.  Maybe I miss the point of this discussion but some of this is the reason I think I will always prefer the face to face discussions for some subjects.

Here's what I wrote back:

The real issue is that the educational process is so variable.  We can design, design, design to get effective educational materials and activities for our instruction, but we still can't account for the variability in humans as learners.  We can design multiple entry points into the instruction (audio, video, verbal, etc.), but we'll still never hit all the learners.

As for your comment that "participation has been proven to improve the levels of comprehension and absorption for the kinds of things most graduate students are expected to learn in their programs," I'm gonna disagree with you on that, but it could just be semantics.

When I teach my instructional design courses, I spend an entire day discussing the question "what is the difference between information and instruction?"  Answers are all over the place.  Most instructors think they are providing instructional activities to their students, but in reality they are just disseminating information; they are regurgitating content.  The difference between information and instruction is the ability to practice.  Instruction will involve the ability for the learner to practice and receive feedback. Here is a link to a blog post I wrote on just that topic, with an example of what a grad student response to the question might be (mine from grad school is posted there).

If you take your quote and change it to "PRACTICE has been proven to improve the levels of comprehension and absorption for the kinds of things most graduate students are expected to learn in their programs", then I'd agree (thus my assertion that we just might be disagreeing on semantics.)  Otherwise, I think your comment is an overgeneralization.  Content is too variable.

I do agree with you that some content lends itself better for face to face instruction.  Even as an instructional designer and educational technologist, I don't think everything should be taught online.  It just doesn't work.  Once I was an instructional designer for an online college algebra class.  It was the hardest thing I've ever designed.  The technology we have today wasn't available, and it was a nightmare.  Now, with that said, online components and simulations can ENHANCE face to face instruction (as can be seen with this story about brain surgeons practicing on virtual brains), but I still want my doctors and pilots to have practiced and learned on someone else before I need their services.

So what do y'all think?

(POI) Week one questions

The book we are using is Teaching online: A practical guide, by Ko and Rossen.  Week one had us reading chapters one and two.  We then answered the following questions:

Question #1: How would you implement online discussions in your course?

Question #2: To help students become involved in an online course, what should be included in the syllabus to help guide the students toward active/successful participation?

Here is my (partial) response:

Well, before I get to my answers, I think it may help a little to give you my background so you'll have insight into how I got here.

I feel like a kid here at the university (I'm only 41), but all through grad school all of my research was in online learning.  As a master's student I was selected to design and teach the first fully online course in the state of Utah.  Also while a grad student I helped design the Syllabase online course delivery system (a precursor to products like D2L). I've probably either designed or taught almost 30 different online course during my career (I worked in faculty development at my last school--much like H. and K. here).  My Ph.D. is in instructional design--specifically focused in this area.  So if there is ANY WAY to screw up an online course, I'll be I've done it at least twice . . .. I put all this on the table because I find this stuff VERY interesting.  I'm taking the course here to help myself be better, and to hopefully share some of what I've learned.  So you can take all of this with a grain of salt, but here are my answers . . .

2) As I stated in my response to someone else, "participation" in an online course is a HORRIBLE criteria.  It's extremely difficult to measure effectively, and it's very subjective. Some will think they participated well, and other's simply won't care.  What you have to do is structure the assignments so that you take "participation" out of the equation when it comes to assessment.  Either they did the assignments, or they didn't.  There are plenty of ways to make sure that learners do this.  I'm not a fan of counting posts.  BOOOOO!  There are actually a lot of published rubrics that evaluate the content of a post rather than the number.  Think about it.  Would you rather have a student in your face to face class who talked constantly (online: posts all the time), or would you rather have one who inputs meaningfully into the discussion, even if it is only one comment?  I'll take meaningful discussion anytime.  The trick is not letting your students get away with meaningless posts.  I find when I teach online I spend a lot of time responding to students saying things like: "Do you really mean that?" or "Is that what you really want to say?"  See, students, if they think they can get away without having to back up their comments, will say anything.  In a f2f class, we'll question them and press them for follow up.  It's harder and more time consuming to do in an online format, but I'd argue it's almost MORE important to do.  So long story short (too late!) I never grade "participation" as a criteria.

As for what needs to be in the syllabus? DETAIL, DETAIL, DETAIL.  You have to spell it out, brother!

Preparing Online Instructors (POI)

So I've been feeling the need to get back to blogging.  It's been tough, though, as I go up for tenure this coming fall, and I've been focusing on getting my research published.  Actually, I guess I've been more "micro-blogging" on FaceBook.  But my heart has been here.  I know there is a lot being written about the future of blogs like this, but I'll be honest with you: while it is really inspiring to hear from people who read this blog (even--especially--when they don't agree with me), my intended audience here is me.

As I said, I go up for tenure this coming fall, and that brings with it extra pressure.  And last semester wasn't a good one.  Yes, I got three publications, but my teaching wasn't to the level I'm accustomed to.  And to make matters worse, while I research and design online instruction, they were all online courses, and I definitely didn't practice what I preach.  So I figured I needed to "sharpen my saw."  To do this, I enrolled in a course offered by the faculty development group here at Oklahoma State University. The title of the course? The title of this post: Preparing Online Instructors.

We're one week in, and I'm already feeling weird about taking the class.  There is quite a range in technological expertise amongst the students, and an even broader range about pedagogy.  To be honest, as an instructional designer and when it comes to online instruction, I feel that I'm more experienced than the instructors.  Now that's not a knock on them, I just think I've done more.  So as we've started discussions, I find I write a lot more detail--based on my experience--than the other learners.  I'm afraid I'm going to come off looking like the "know-it-all," and I don't want that.  But if you're going to ask me a question, you had better want my answer, because I'll give it to you.

I thought the course would be a good way to get back to blogging, so here's what I'm going to do.  As I participate in discussions, I'm going to post my responses here.  I don't really know why other than if I'm going to spend that much time writing, I'd like feedback on my ideas and thoughts from those within my field.  So feel free to comment.

One more thing, I'll never identify a classmate by name.  I'll use an initial.

Here we go . . .

Cammy Bean on instructional design

Cammy Bean is the Manager of Instructional Design for Invision Learning in Southborough, MA. The interview was done for my students in EDTC 5753: Introduction to Instructional Design. In it, Cammy discusses her background, how she came to the instructional design field, what her current day-to-day job as an instructional designer is like, what skills she feels are important for instructional designers, and what she feels the future of the field will be.

Alan Young on Instructional Design

Here's an interview with Alan Young, Director of Curriculum Development at Brigham Young University-Idaho. The interview was done for my students in EDTC 5753: Introduction to Instructional Design. In it, Alan discusses his background, how he came to the instructional design field, what his current day-to-day job as an instructional designer is like, what skills he feels are important for instructional designers, and what he feels the future of the field will be.

Dr. Jennifer Summerville on Instructional Design

Here's an interview with Jennifer Summerville, Ph.D, Associate Dean for the Distance and Weekend College for Collin College. The interview was done for my students in EDTC 5753: Introduction to Instructional Design. In it, Dr. Summerville discusses her background, how she came to the instructional design field, what her current day-to-day job is like, what skills she feels are important for instructional designers, and what she feels the future of the field will be.

This podcast had to be removed for clearance purposes.

Dr. Andrew Teasdale on Instructional Design

Here's an interview with Andrew Teasdale, Ph.D, an instructional designer in the Clinical Guidance Organization for Humana Health Care. The interview was done for my students in EDTC 5753: Introduction to Instructional Design. In it, Dr. Teasdale discusses his background, how he came to the instructional design field, what his current day-to-day job as an instructional designer is like, what skills he feels are important for instructional designers, and what he feels the future of the field will be.

How to get an Instructional Design education without paying tuition

Well, yesterday Cammy has responded to my post on the disconnect between academic instructional design and practical instructional design. Subsequently, the last five hours or so has been interesting. First of all, I see that Stephen Downes has mentioned our conversation on OLD~Daily, and that has led to a number of comments on my blog as well as others posting about them on their blogs.

I've got to admit, I'm enjoying thinking about these questions.

Wendy Wickham from In the Middle of the Curve has joined the conversation. Wendy has an MA in Instructional Technology from Towson University (I don't think I know anyone on that faculty). Wendy makes a good point saying:

How I use theory - selling my instructional design ideas.

People respond to jargon. And, interestingly, people love learning other people's jargon. I had never seen such an excited group of people as the day I introduced ADDIE to the Project Management group and related that process to how they do business.

Do I use ADDIE? Not always - but it does seem to be a nice way to keep track of the status of my ID projects.

Citing academic theory makes it sound like you are putting more effort into it than "I dunno - this just made sense. Whadya think?"

Do I need my MS in Instructional Technology to practice? No. The theoretical ammunition I received in that program helps.

Great point. I had the same experience working with some military officials earlier this year. But later Cammy responds:

I completely agree that this stuff impresses clients. I use it all the time.

But one can learn the jargon without going to grad school. And one can cite the academic theory by reading and staying informed.

Perhaps the (somewhat cynical) question to ask is -- what's the right amount of jargon needed to get by? Do I need to know all of the things on John's list?

Personally, I don't think so. I've gotten by well enough without most of those theories, it seems.

This comes back to my quest from last year of getting an informal masters in ID.

If one were to construct an informal, self-paced, DIY instructional design curriculum, what content would you include?

So Cammy, only because I'm a big fan of yours, I present How to get an Instructional Design education without paying tuition.

Look at me go! My first Vodcast . . .

So I decided to try something new--not radical, but new for me--with my online 3123 class this semester. I just thought it would be a nice change from either a text introduction or the audio introduction I did with a simple podcast last semester. Now it's nothing fancy, but I've already heard back from students who have told me how refreshing they felt it was.

I guess it's just the illusion of normalcy. At any rate, I've uploaded it to my YouTube account, and you can see the whole thing (it's only 14 minutes, including buffer music) where I introduce myself and my philosophy of the undergrad preservice teacher course. You can also see different movie clips I use in the course on that YouTube page.

See the vodcast after the jump. Nope. It's too long for YouTube. Here's the link.

Blogs, RSS feeds, and Del.icio.us

I remember last October giggling as I read Trey Martindale's blog post stating (follow the link to read the whole thing):

My friend John Curry reminded me that I’m not posting very often on my blog these days, and he’s right. It seems I’m taking a shorter route–kind of “mini-blogging”. Basically I’m just saving and tagging interesting net resources in my delicious bookmarks account. I now have over 1000 items in that account, and it’s been useful for me, and for students–sort of like my external long-term memory. So, if you would like to know what I’m reading about, investigating, or find interesting, that’s the place.

Me in four slides

So a few weeks ago Dan Meyer, who writes dy/dan, held a four slide contest. The purpose was to see if you could represent yourself completely in four slides. Now the problem for me is that I have NO TALENT when it comes to visual representation, but I want my grad students in my online EDTC 5203: Foundations of Educational Technology course to do it as a way of getting to know each other. So, I made mine to serve as an example. I don't know how good they are (actually, I know they're not good), and they would certainly never win any awards, but they do represent me. See them after the jump.

Site updates

Man, this term has been BUSY. I've been reading a lot, but I haven't been posting. I'm trying to keep up with what's going on, and I've been updating my Del.icio.us bookmarks (as well as those for our undergrad EdTech course), but blogging hasn't been in the schedule this week.

I have added some blogs to my EdTech blogs page, and I'm trying to find a Del.icio.us plugin that I like for WordPress.

At any rate, here are some of the new websites I've found:

Foundations readings revisited

So, apparently something crazy has happened. Just one day after I get that list posted of readings for my Foundations class, I found another book. I checked to see if I could change my order for fall, but I really shouldn't--not can't, it'll just be a pain.

Reiser, R.A. & Dempsy, J.V. (2007). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. 2nd edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

It's all the other stuff combined, the types of readings I wanted, and it's recent. Personally, I'm giddy with anticipation.

Reading list for Foundations of Educational Technology

So I'm finishing up my syllabus and reading list for this fall's Foundations of Educational Technology class. It is meant to be the introductory course for all our Master's and Doctoral students. I initially started with the syllabus used at Utah State (my alma mater), and from there I worked on it and tried to get it to what I thought and felt was relevant for our students today. Here's what I've got so far (and that's pretty much how it's going to stay unless something crazy happens):

• Clark, J. & Dede, C. (2006, June). Robust designs for scalability. Paper to be presented at the Association for Educational Communications and Technology Research Symposia, Bloomington, IN.

• Ely, D.P. & Plomp, T. (1996). Classic writings on Instructional Technology, Volume 1. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited. (Select chapters)

o AECT. The Definition of Educational Technology: A Summary
o Churchman, C.W. On the Design of Educational Systems
o Davies, I.K. Educational Technology: Archetypes, Paradigms and Models
o Gagné, R.M. Learning Hierarchies
o Heinich, R. Is There a Field of Educational Communications and Technology?
o Skinner, B.F. The Science of Learning and the Art of Teaching

• Ely, D.P. & Plomp, T. (2001). Classic writings on Instructional Technology, Volume 2. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited. (Select chapters)

o Clark, R.E. Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media
o Dick, W. & Carey, L. The Systematic Design of Instruction: Origins of Systematically Designed Instruction
o Hannafin, M.J. Emerging Technologies, ISD, and Learning Environments: Critical Perspectives
o Heinich, R. The Proper Study of Instructional Technology
o Jonassen, D.H. Objectivism versus Constructivism: Do We Need a New Philosophical Paradigm?
o Reigeluth, C.M. In Search of a Better Way to Organize Instruction: The Elaboration Theory

• Gibbons, A.S. & Rogers, C.P. (2006, June). Coming at design from a different angle: Functional design. Paper to be presented at the Association for Educational Communications and Technology Research Symposia, Bloomington, IN.

• Jonassen, D., Strobel, J., & Gottdenker, J. (2006, June). Model building for conceptual change. Paper to be presented at the Association for Educational Communications and Technology Research Symposia, Bloomington, IN.

• Merrill, M. D., Drake, L., Lacy, M. J., & Pratt, J. (1996). Reclaiming instructional design. Educational Technology, 36 (5), 5-7.

• Merrill, M.D. (2000). Write your dissertation first and other essays on graduate education. Available: http://cito.byuh.edu/merrill/text/papers.htm

• Merrill, M.D. (2002). A pebble in the pond model for instructional design. Performance Improvement, 41(7), 39-44.

• Merrill, M.D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research & Development, 50(3), 43-59.

• Reiber, L. (1998). The proper way to become an instructional technologist. 1998 Peter Dean Lecture, Division of Learning and Performance Enhancements, Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

• Reiser, R.A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part II: A history of instructional design. Educational Technology Research & Development, 49(2), 57-67.

• Ross, S.A. & Morrison, G.R. (2001). Getting started in instructional technology research. Association for Educational Communications and Technnology. http://www.aect.org

• Seels, B.B. & Richey, R.C. (1994). Instructional Technology: The definition and domains of the field. Bloomington, IN: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

• Spector, J.M. (2006, June). From learning to instruction: Adventures and advances in instructional design. Paper to be presented at the Association for Educational Communications and Technology Research Symposia, Bloomington, IN.

• vanMerriënboer, J.J.G., Clark, R.E., & deCroock, M.B.M. (2002). Blueprints for complex learning: The 4C/ID model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), 39-64.

• Wiley, D. A. (2000). Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), The Instructional Use of Learning Objects: Online Version. http://reusability.org/read/chapters/wiley.doc

Basically, I tried to find articles in four different areas: History of the field, how to study the field, select design theories (old and new) and current research.

Comments welcome.

Open Source CMS

This summer term I am teaching (in addition to the EDTC 3123 -- preservice teacher technology course) EDTC 5153: Computer-based Instructional Development. I have six graduate students enrolled--none from the College of Education. I have two Chemistry master's candidates, two from TESL (one master's, one doctoral), and two master's candidates from International Studies. It will be nice to get some students from our program in these classes as well.

At any rate, the course focuses on desiging and creating web-based instruction. I initially designed the course to be your basic instructional design, website design and development class, and then I thought better of it. It seems to me that we're past that now. As I looked through my webhosting package from BlueHost, I noticed that I had access to about ten or so different CMS packages.

So I thought to myself (having just gone through the process of helping choose a new COURSE management system for OSU) that a more relevant class might be how to design the instruction and how to evaluate different CMS packages--because I have access, right?--and develop the instruction in a CMS. That seems more "real world." So I eagerly installed instances of the following:

• Drupal


• Geeklog


• Joomla


• Mambo


• PHP-Nuke


• phpWCMS


• phpWebsite


• Post-Nuke


• TYPO3


• Xoops


• Moodle


• BlackBoard (I just used the course OSU made for our class)

So how's it going? Well, what does CMS stand for? Course Management System (as I was thinking) or Content Management System (as most of these are). I think the course is going well, and we're getting a lot of really practical experience. But it would have been nice if more had been COURSE management systems.