EDUC 8848 Module 2 Posting

McLuhan's Tetrad and the iPad

In our learning group, we decided to put the Apple iPad device through McLuhan’s tetrad.  The iPad is an emerging technology that is rewriting some of the rules of technology both inside and outside of the educational environment.  While it does not offer the full functionality of a desktop or laptop computer, the lines between these devices are becoming blurred.

Enhances:

One of the greatest aspects of the iPad device is that it truly is portable.  Since there are no wires or peripherals needed to control the iPad, individuals can use the device in almost any location.  Combine this with wireless and 3G data access and anyone can use the iPad almost anywhere, except maybe underwater.  Students can search for material at their desks, in the hallway, or even outside during recess.  Teachers can walk around with their iPad and show students just about anything from grades to applications (or apps) related to the content they teach.  Another feature that makes the iPad more portable is its size and weight.  Laptops used to weigh between fifteen and twenty pounds.  “Light” versions still weigh in between three and five pounds.  The iPad weights a mere 1.33 pounds and is just a little smaller in size than a legal pad.  For students, this device could replace bulky textbooks.  For teachers, it could significantly lighten their bags with no need to carry grade books, teacher editions, or even student work to grade.

Obsoletes:

While the iPad has not, in my opinion, replaced the traditional desktop or laptop, it has gotten pretty close.  When you think about what users need in a mobile computer, they often look to complete work tasks like emailing, using productivity tools (e.g. Office, Adobe tools, etc.), and entertaining themselves.  Right now, the iPad can do all of these things, up to a point.  Users can check and respond to emails, compose documents similar to Microsoft Word, and even entertain themselves with apps like Netflix (or is it Qwikster?!?) or Angry Birds.  However, they still cannot use Flash, play games like World of Warcraft, or craft a PowerPoint presentation with audio and video as they could with a traditional computer.  That said, most end users do not use the iPad for those processor/graphics-intensive purposes.  They view this content and respond to it via social networking or office email accounts.  I think the iPad could serve as a tool to replace portable gaming devices such as the Nintendo DS or Sony PSP, but this is still a long time coming.

Retrieves/Rekindles:

When looking at old television shows from the past, the iPad device reminds me of the Star Trek PADD.  If you watched Star Trek: The Next Generation, there were numerous types of handheld input devices that the characters used to interface with the ship’s mainframe computer.  This strikes me as similar as the iPad interfacing with “the cloud.”  In the show, users input messages, looked up data, and planned strategies all with the use of the PADD device.  In real life, users input messages, search the internet, and Skype with others to plan out their attacks in the corporate world.  I have to wonder if Steve Jobs and/or other Apple developers deliberately sought to recreate the PADD because of Star Trek.  Through great imagination and ingenuity, developers took science fiction and made it a reality.  This could be attributed to John Sculley who developed the Newton MessagePad device, the first embodiment of the iPad.   This device contained similar tools found on the iPod and iPhone. 

Reverses:

I feel that tablet computers, such as the iPad will soon spell the end of laptops, netbooks, and in a much distant future, desktop computers.  As I mentioned before, the iPad can do just about anything a typical computer user would need.  Thinking more in my personal realm, I think that computer gaming companies will have to rethink their products and how they are delivered.  If you remember traditional computer games, the graphics were basic (and in BASIC) .  Now, gaming companies are developing more robust artifacts and worlds to explore.  This trend exploded when the cost of computer components fell.  Now, the challenge would be to take a game like World of Warcraft or Rift which take up between 4 to 8 (or more) gigabytes of hard disk space and convert them to a tablet device like the iPad.  How can we take an MMO which usually requires a mouse, keyboard, speakers, microphone (for voice chat collaboration), gaming computer and monitor, and condense it to fit on an iPad device?  Moreover, how do we take the game and transfer it over where the quality is equivalent or greater to the original?  When we can get computer gamers unplugged from their Ethernet cables and outside of the confines of their houses, could we have some social change?  Could gamers easily meet up, connect their iPads to the internet and commence gaming with others instead of being locked away at home?  Would they want to?  I think these are all questions we might see answered if developers seriously move from traditional gaming to iPad (tablet) versions of the same games. 






Reference

Thornburg, D. D. (2008). Emerging technologies and McLuhan's Laws of Media. Lake Barrington, IL: Thornburg Center for Space Exploration.


Images courtesy of:
http://images.apple.com/ipad/specs/images/ipad_front.jpg
http://news.cnet.com/i/tim/2010/07/12/Angry_Birds.png
http://srigk.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/padd.jpg
http://www.riftgame.com/img/media/screenshots/ss309/ss309-large.jpg

EDUC 8848 Module 1 Blog Posting

EDUC 8848 Module 1 Posting

This week we were asked to identify a current technology which has emerged in our industry. In this case, I will be discussing the education field. We were also asked to identify the challenges this innovation faced and what societal needs it addresses. Finally, we were asked to improve upon this technology in order to avoid the challenges.

Here goes...
When considering technologies that have shaped the education field over the past years, I had many to choose from. I saw laptops, netbooks, streaming video, and even Smart Boards as potential candidates. However, one technology emerged which has had a significant impact on education, wireless internet or WiFi connectivity. As Thornburg (2009) mentioned, wireless internet allows students and teachers to be mobile learners. Instead of being stuck in front of a computer wired into the wall or in a computer lab, internet use can done anywhere within the range of the wireless signal.

One major challenge facing schools with wireless internet is need for upgrading. In my previous district, there was a major bond program which added hard wired internet along with Ethernet cabling for all classrooms. Less than five years later, this type of networking is not compatible with new devices such as tablet computers. iPads, for example, only use wireless internet or a 3G mobile connection. If a school has not invested in wireless internet, iPad use would be limited.

Another challenge facing wireless internet is balancing security with accessibility. Schools are rightly concerned with allowing access for students and staff while restricting access to outsiders. However, in order to secure this access, schools risks creating log in routines and passwords that are too difficult for users. This type of gate-keeping can easily turn off users from wanting to access the internet. If acquiring access takes longer than searching for content, the users might simply avoid using the wireless resource at all.

A need wireless internet meets is allowing the mobile computing I mentioned before. Lessons do not always take place within the walls of a school. Students can explore the outdoors, tablet computers in hand, and access content while on the move. By adding a wider radius of access, students could access the internet in homes where this is only seen as a luxury. Some students never benefit from computer use or internet access because of their socioeconomic status. If they were able to access the same content as their affluent peers, they might improve their academic achievement and knowledge base.

I would like to improve two pieces of wireless internet. My first issue is that internet use is a luxury item that many cannot afford. There has to be a way that we could subsidize wireless internet accessibility for all citizens, regardless of where they are located or their economic status. Secondly, we have to address security issues with wireless devices. There must be a way that we enter one password, one time, and we can access a wireless network seamlessly. Wireless internet is no fun when I have to keep a list of separate user keys/passwords just to access my email or watch an episode of Two Broke Girls. I have found many instances of “free wireless” no-password connections in airports and around town which are nothing more than someone trying to hack/phish/steal etc. my information.

So I ask, when will we have blanket coverage of secured wireless internet for all citizens? Is this a possibility, or is this a pipe dream?

Reference
Thornburg, D. D. (2009). Current trends in educational technology. Lake Barrington, IL: Thornburg Center for Space Exploration.

Wireless router image courtesy of: http://www.piyushshekhar.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/wireless-router.jpg

8842 Final Video Link

Here is the link to my video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r0q-pMuW7E

Module 5 Posting

In this module we were asked to highlight the differences in static and dynamic technologies used in distance education. Here is my concept map:

While I would want to be on the more dynamic end of distance education, I currently do not have the access or even skills needed to use some of the tools Moller (2008) and McGreal & Elliott (2010) mentioned. I feel I am more in the transitional between static and dynamic content. I use static content such as streaming audio and video to deliver the content to my students. To move towards the dynamic end of the scale, I could deliver content via virtual worlds or games. An idea I have, past the dissertation, is to create a foreign language game where students are immersed in the target language, and explore content related to lessons being taught. For example, students would begin learning greetings and farewells in their game tutorial lessons. Then, they would progress to a new skill, say numbers 0-10, but still would use the content learned in the first lesson. A barrier is that most virtual games are text based where voice commands are not frequently used. When technology improves more with gaming, students would be able to give voice commands, in the target language, which would control their characters.


As far as collaboration goes, I see my level more in the static realm with wikis and blogs. Being an introvert and private person, I do not use many of the online collaboration tools like Skype and videoconferencing. I prefer more text based communication, as it is more suited to my communication style. However, as Fahy (2010) mentioned, text based communication does not reach all audiences. I need to move towards incorporating more graphics and audio, and yes, break out of my introvert shell. In my personal realm, I do collaborate more when I play my multiplayer games. I do use voice chat and the game as a backdrop to lay out plans for success. I could take this interest of mine and work with students in this comfortable area so I can go beyond my text messages.


The biggest concern I see with settling in with these new technologies for distance education is that they are constantly changing. Once I get comfortable learning something and developing course content, a new and improved tool comes out. I have no problem learning new tools, the concern is migrating my content from one platform to another. There is more work involved in changing content to match platforms than tweaking content that may not be as effective for the students. I fully embrace changes in education, just hate feeling like I wasted inordinate amounts of time to develop something that: either nobody accesses or has to be changed in a couple of years.



References

Fahy, P. J. (2010). Characteristics of interactive online learning media. In T. Anderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (pp. 167-200). Edmonton, AB: AU Press.

McGreal, R., & Elliott, M. (2010). Technologies of online learning (E-learning). In T. Anderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (pp. 143-166). Edmonton, AB: AU Press.

Moller, L. (2008). Static and dynamic technological tools. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/courses/14936/CRS-WUEDUC8812-3730064/8842_M5_Paper.pdf

Module 4 Posting

In order to create an interactive online course, Durrington, Berryhill & Swafford (2006) discussed key factors that are present in effective courses. They stated instructors need to provide timely feedback and students need to have high levels of interactivity. Both of these communication areas can be addressed with technology in many ways. For teachers to provide timely feedback, courses can use drop boxes where students submit work to be graded. This prevents work being lost in emails or files being too large to send. As soon as work is submitted, the professor is notified and can begin evaluating the student’s submission. This feedback could also come in the way of a chat via Skype or text based programs where the student and professor talk about the assignment. This creates interactivity between the teacher and student while also creating quicker feedback. There is nothing worse for a student than waiting two weeks for an assignment to be graded, wondering if the work they submitted was acceptable. If chat options are not available, instructors can also employ the editing/track changes feature found in most productivity software. Here, the comments which would have been saved for chat can be expressed to the student. The student could resubmit work, and the professor could go back and grade again if necessary.

Another set of communication concerns comes with student-student communication. Since students are essentially isolated from each other, they need some way to connect with their colleagues. This can be done with synchronous and asynchronous chat rooms and discussion boards. If students want to connect at a certain time (or are required to do so), having these options available helps facilitate communication. To move the teacher into Siemens’ curatorial role, it is possible to have students moderate and evaluate the weekly discussions. Not only are they learning the skill of communication from an instructor’s viewpoint, but they are becoming more engaged as they have to go deeper into the content of a message, instead of blindly agreeing with what the original poster said. They could also provide more information which would require further individual research which usually was a task the instructors completed. Finally, When groups are chosen for projects or assignments, Durrington, Berryhill & Swafford (2006) suggest creating separate spaces for each group to communicate. This way they can focus only on their topic and not have the background noise of the other groups’ work.

When developing and presenting the content of a course, Siemens (2007) discussed the idea of the instructor as curator. Essentially, the instructor provides all of the course artifacts and guides the student with the expectation that the student would generate knowledge from the resources. The instructor is no longer the lecturer in the class, but provides resources that he/she thinks would be best suited for their students. In an online environment, this could include podcasts or vodcasts that feature pioneers in the field of study or simply lectures from previous years. The professor could also reserve library articles of interest and post those to the class homepage. In order to meet the different learning styles of students, the instructor could consider posting transcripts and slides from shows instead of just the videos or audio files. It is easier for students to search text files for interesting points instead of jumping around in audio files. To generate knowledge and not recite what is already known, the instructors could create scenarios or real life problems for the groups of students to solve. For example, in our 8842 course, we were presented with a case-study. Based on our readings of other course text, we were expected to generate solutions for a school’s concerns about starting an online section of classes. As we are working with a diverse population of students, it is important to keep traditional textbooks while allowing e-books as well. Not all students want to give up textbooks, especially as reading online causes eyestrain. Finally, to provide content, instructors should ensure the course can be viewed on mobile devices. As students might use those more often than laptops and computers, having access to the files and videos can help students stay connected to the course.

Collaboration and communication within a course can be done with tools such as online meeting software which allows users to connect with each other on a central computer. If I had files we needed to work on for a group, I could host a meeting and the group could participate in editing the document live. This prevents editing issues or individual concerns being left out after chat conversations take place. Combine this software with Skype or other videoconferencing and students thousands of miles apart can work together, see each other, and communicate beyond text messages or other typed words. As mentioned above, instructors can use traditional chat rooms or discussion boards for students to type messages if users are not comfortable using teleconferencing (or don’t have the necessary equipment). When our new technology fails, or users choose not to use it, there is always the telephone that can be used. A simple phone call is easy to make and is much cheaper than in previous decades, even internationally. A final way classes can collaborate is through the use of Wikis within a class. Say the class decides to create their own online class for future use. A wiki could be used where each person contributes and edits information. Each person is contributing to the final project and can see the contributions of others. The professors moves from lecturer to guide and encourages learners to participate if they are not pulling their weight.


References

Durrington, V. A., Berryhill, A., & Swafford, J. (2006, Winter). Strategies for enhancing student interactivity in an online environment. College Teaching, 54(1), 190-193. Retrieved from ProQuest Central.

Siemens, G. (Producer). (2007, September 10). 10 Minute Lecture – George Siemens – Curatorial Teaching [Audio podcast]. Retrieved from http://learnonline.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/10-minute-lecture-george-siemens-curatorial-teaching/

Issues in On-Line Collaboration

As Siemens (2008) mentioned, a collaborative learning community should be assessed by the contributions of its members. This could include the amount of input and feedback a user provides, participation in listservs or similar message boards, or simply counting the amount of times a user accesses the content. Using some of these methods could allow professors to assess fairly keeping in mind the different skill levels of participants. Discussion boards and listservs require limited skill requirements to participate. Some just require the use of email and responding to messages via the same method. With the assumption the learners are required to use technology to access the course, this type of collaboration does not require much more skill.

Measuring participation has fallen into a couple of categories that can be subverted by savvy students. One area is the amount of time spent in a module or looking over discussions of others. Unless schools implement timing out systems, students can sit for hours with the course in the background. This causes problems though as some users can read many posts over a time frame and would be frustrated having to log in repeatedly. Another area of concern is measuring the quantity of work submitted to the collaborative group. Simple “I agree” or “Good point” responses often flood discussions and offer no benefit for the group. Instead of learning, the group turns into the mutual admiration society where everyone agrees with the author, no matter the topic. There will always be some form of subjectivity when grading participation because using targets like “2 responses of at least 100 words” becomes a game of just counting the words and not focusing on the quality of the response.

One area that is hard for an instructor to gauge in collaborative assignments is the amount of knowledge a student brings. Unless the student self identifies that he/she is skilled or not in a certain area, the instructor usually does not know. However, in collaborative assignments, the skilled student could teach the unskilled their knowledge which would allow two types of assessment. The skilled student could be measured on how well they really knew the material by how well the unskilled student mastered the content. The unskilled student could also be assessed on their knowledge after being exposed to the new material. Both participants could evaluate each other. The unskilled student could evaluate how effective the skilled student was in presenting the material. The opportunities for evaluation in collaborative environments are there, but require a change of focus from both instructors and students.

Pallof and Pratt (2005) mentioned one area where instructors and institutions could improve upon. When dealing with reluctant or non-cooperative students, they suggest providing information for students in conflict resolution. Usually, when students want to work alone, either they are allowed to do so, or the group just does the work without them and grumbles about it. As students see themselves as equals, it is hard to move into the role of trying to convince someone else to do their part of the work. Peer pressure is not effective and students worry about offending the other party, especially if technical issues or family emergencies caused the lack of participation. The two prior situations could also be solved by the authors’ suggestions of having the instructor set guidelines and procedures of what the group should do in similar settings. Finally, the instructor has to take an active role in equalizing the participation within the community. Some users are excited to contribute and could scare off others while some users just prefer to say little. The instructor should help encourage dialogue, but be careful when asking users to pull back as not to totally shut down a very active participant.

References

Laureate Education, Inc . (Producer). (2008). Assessment of Collaborative Learning [Video Program]. Available from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4930715&Survey=1&47=7102460&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1.

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

EDUC 8842 Posting 2

Growing up in a more rural area of Texas, I was not accustomed to much diversity in school. Sure, we had some students who were Hispanic or African American, but they were very few. My years in college were a little more diverse as my school reached out to get more students from around the world. But, before the use of on-line courses, the majority of the students were just like me. We had some different viewpoints based on our religious or political beliefs, but we had a similar view of the world, through the lens of a middle-class, Caucasian, southern United States, student. With the invention of the internet and cheap communication across the globe, colleges and universities have been able to attract a more diverse population of students from around the world. Siemens (2008) highlighted this increase in diversity with the creation of distance learning. Instead of working with just people of similar backgrounds, living the same experience I have lived, I am interacting with colleagues whose lives are completely different. I am finding that what works in courses in the United States might be viewed as totally off-base in other cultures. Walden University appears to be very diverse in the student population. I have worked with students from Puerto Rico, parts of Africa, and South America. I am also learning how to communicate with other students from backgrounds who may not understand the nuances of the language I use. My use of humor may not be well received with individuals who don’t understand double entendres or sarcasm. Emoticons may not transfer over either. I have even had to reevaluate how I address people in discussion postings (e.g. instead of using first names, some people want to be addressed as Mr. or Mrs. and their last name. Technology has most definitely been the key to global diversity in classes. Innovations like web cameras, videoconferencing online, and Skype telephone calls have increased the capacity for students to interact across the globe. Universities also use discussion boards to eliminate the problem of time zones in these types of courses. I can interact with classmates, even if they are asleep. By reading their posts, commenting on their blogs, or viewing their saved videos on YouTube, I can continue my learning. Reference: Laureate Education, Inc . (Producer). (2008). The future of distance education [Video Program]. Available from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4930715&Survey=1&47=7102460&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1.

EDUC 8842 Posting #1

Module 1 Blog Posting:

Topic: After reading the three articles by Moller, Huett, Foshay and Coleman, and listening to the Simonson video programs, compare and contrast the reasons these authors believe there is a need to evolve distance education to the next generation. Do you agree with their positions? Why or why not?

Response:

As Simonson (2008a) mentioned, distance education is not a new phenomenon. There have been many incarnations of distance education from correspondence courses to tele-courses from local community colleges. One thing he mentioned is that he does not see distance education experiencing a radical growth in the next few years. Also, he does not foresee distance course supplanting traditional education in face to face settings. I have to agree that this is something that will not happen as there are learners who still prefer going to class and sitting with fellow students in a live class. There is an experience in going to college where there is camaraderie between classmates and learning from professors while in a lecture hall or classroom format. Where I see distance education becoming more popular is with graduate students and working adults. Without Walden University and its online format, I would not be able to pursue my Ph.D. as I could not afford to give up my income and my job in teaching. As a working adult with bills and obligations, I need the flexibility to have classes online and distance education fills this need.

Moller, Huett, Foshay and Coleman (2008) discussed how distance education can be used to help students in K-12 settings. With mandates like No Child Left Behind requiring failing schools to provide alternative education for students, some proponents see distance education as a solution. This is one area I am not convinced will experience much success. Unfortunately, many students are not mature enough for the rigors of true distance education. Granted there are courses where students just have to click through assignments to get credit, but that is not learning. Ask the parents of most teenagers and they will tell you that the students just do not have the self-discipline and motivation to complete coursework that requires learning to occur. The authors call for instructional designers to answer the challenge of develop meaningful and engaging curriculum, but I wonder if this would actually solve the problem of distance learning in the K-12 setting. An exciting curriculum is not enough to entice a teenager away from other distractions like video games, Facebook, and texting their friends.

So what are the next steps in distance education in my view?

Higher Education:
Something I am worried about is the saturation of the market for distance learning providers. From for profit institutions to traditional schools offering courses, there are almost too providers, each with their own format. Some institutions are little more than diploma mills while others provide top notch education for adult learners. I see the market for these services growing, but the number of schools declining as the competition for students forces minor players out of the market.

K-12
There is potential to serve a specialized population of students who would learn best by distance education. What should not happen is just placing students in front of computers to save money on school budgets. Computers cannot replace a quality teacher with passion for their subject matter. This passion costs money. We are shortchanging our students when we, without offering them a choice, force them to learn on computer...even if they are not willing, or capable of doing so.

Ray

References:

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

Laureate Education, Inc . (Producer). (2008a). Distance education: The next generation [Video Program]. Available from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4930715&Survey=1&47=7102460&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Laureate Education, Inc . (Producer). (2008b). Equivalency theory [Video Program]. Available from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4930715&Survey=1&47=7102460&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

(In order to view the videos, you need to be a student at Walden University).