10 Key Questions for Online and Blended Course Design

Oldy, but a goody...original developed circa 2002 app. for blended; myself and Alan Aycock revised circa 2006 for online course delivery.


1.       As you think about your course redesign, which of your course objectives might be met more successfully online than in a traditional face-to-face classroom? In consequence, what new learning activities do you think you might introduce into your course?

2.       Since you will be reducing “seat time” partially or wholly in your course, you need to identify alternative ways to deliver course content. Think about a specific topic that you usually present to your face-to-face class. How might you make that portion of your course content available online?

3.       Traditional testing is not the only way to assess your students’ work in an online environment. What other means of assessing or documenting student learning might you decide to use online?

4.       Asynchronous discussion forums and small group work can play a key role in online courses. What new learning opportunities will the use of asynchronous discussion and small group work open up for your students? What problems do you anticipate in using online discussions or small group work?

5.       With the reduction or removal of seat time, your students will not be meeting face-to-face as frequently as in a traditional course, if at all. How will you develop a cohesive and well functioning peer group of online learners?

6.       Students often have very unrealistic ideas about the amount and kind of work required for an online or a blended course. As well, students may have problems scheduling their online work and managing their time. How can you help your students to adjust their expectations for the course and manage their time more effectively?

7.       Students sometimes have difficulty acclimating to the course Web site and to other instructional technologies you may be using. What initial steps can you take to assist students to become familiar with your Web site and those instructional technologies?  If students need help with technology later in the course, how will you provide support?

8.       How will you decide if your online or blended course redesign is a good one? For instance, during the initial offering of your course, how will you determine whether mid-semester adjustments are needed?

9.       There is a common tendency for faculty to overcompensate when teaching online or blended courses and require their students (and themselves!) to do more work than they normally would in a face-to-face course (the "course-and-a-half syndrome").  How will you determine the appropriateness of the course requirements, and its implications for your own workload?

If you are redesigning a course for blended delivery, how will you integrate the online and face-to-face components of the course so that they complement and extend one another? How do you think you would divide the percentage of course time and student assessment between online and face-to-face activities?

Questions for Competency Based Programming and Delivery

In reading Fain's article on competency-based education on Inside Higher Ed in April, maybe important points arose that could be used to guide us in our or other institutions development of competency based program, so I started jotting them down.  Then, based on some experiences we, at UWM, have had thus far, I started added others.  

As time moves on, I will revise and add others. In some ways this will be the start to the 10 Questions for X, which we have used for MOOCs, blended, online, virtual worlds, and others.

Questions for Competency Based Programming and Delivery

Who is the audience?  Competency-based education is normally targeted at the least-well served student populations, working adults, front line hourly workers.  They should be highly motivated, self-directed, technologically savvy, and risk takers.

How will you ensure that the competencies are linked to a coherent curriculum, a course of study that is designed to produce something?

Who all will be involved in developing the competencies? Ensuring validity? Will there be any collaboration with national certification or accrediting bodies?  Will there be any corporate/employer collaboration?

What role will faculty plan in producing the competency-base program? It is important that faculty help shape the assignments and assessments.

How will faculty be compensated for the time to design a competency cluster, assessments, and learning activities, and content?

How will the faculty provide personalize feedback to students about assessments from broad concepts to granular details?  Give useful and detailed responses to projects submitted (10 page paper, 2 pages from faculty member)?  What time frame will faculty need to respond to students once an assessment is submitted (48 hours)?

How will faculty be compensated for the time to deliver and provide feedback on their assessments to the students?

What tactics can faculty use in managing their workload in the design and delivery of assessments? Learning activity creation and delivery?  Content design and delivery (e.g., OER)?

How will the advisers play a role in being responsive to students’ needs?

Will advisors be at the campus level? Program level? Course level?  How will they be compensated?

Will the sources of learning be agnostic?  Will books be required?  Will there be a hodgepodge of texts, ebooks, videos, journal articles, experiences at work?

Beyond multiple choice tests, what kinds of assignments can be given to produce projects they would be doing in the workplace for assessment?

How will your students know what learning activities they need to complete in order to meet the standard that will be assessed?

How will faculty make decisions about the content?  How does this content link to the program outcomes?

Where will the learning activities live? Where will the assessments live? 

How will you ensure that the assessments are rigorous, valid, and reliable?

How will the program be priced?  Will there be costs for books or materials?  Most competency-based programs are offered at a reduced price, which can be even lower depending on how quickly students move through the program.  The materials are usually all open-sourced, so there are no additional costs.

How will student performance be determined (competency level, competency cluster, program)?  Will a grade be associated with this performance for the official transcript to facilitate transfer options?  Do they have to pass each competency in a competency cluster (aka course) to get credit? Students may wish to transfer out of the program, so there needs to be a formal way consistent with other university standards to assign grades for level of performance.  Level of performance may be identified as distinguished, proficient, basic, and nonperformance. 

What is the time of delivery for a competency cluster?  Some feel that between 5-10 weeks is adequate time.  How will this affect the financial aid? enrollment and registration? transcripts and transfers? faculty workload?

How will students be oriented to the program? To the technology? To each set of competency clusters? To each assessment (e.g., rubrics)?

How will the competency-based program be evaluated?  How does this compare to traditional f2f, blended, or online programs on campus?

Work in progress...

References:

Fain, P. (April 22^nd, 2013).  Competency-based education’s newest form creates promise and questions. Inside Higher Ed.  

The Next Questions: Five issues in perfecting the blend

The Next Questions: Five issues in perfecting the blend from the Sloan-C Blended conference in Milwaukee, 2012.

In transforming one’s course design for blended learning, the initial efforts tend to focus on course design.  Instructors focus on develop course models, determining what should be accomplished online and face-to-face, and the organization of the course.  After a course is delivered for the first time, several challenges can be encountered and need to be examined in order to perfect the blend.  Anecdotally, it can take up to three (3) semesters to prefect the blended experiences for you and your students.  We have identified “next” questions an instructor should ponder after delivering their course based on our research (see Kaleta, Skibba, and Joosten, 2007) with experienced instructors and our own experiences teaching blended courses. 

1.  Course and a half syndrome

UWM defines the “course and a half syndrome” as the tendency for faculty to be unable to give up any material from their face-to-face course and simply add additional online content and activities to an existing course when they transition to the hybrid model (Aycock, Garnham, & Kaleta, 2002; Skibba, 2005). A number of the research participants succumbed to the "course and a half syndrome" and said that they felt they were “teaching two classes.” Although the dangers of this “syndrome” were stressed often throughout the faculty development training program, many instructors still got “carried away with activities.” Another instructor commented similarly and admitted, “Something that I am probably guilty of … is packing in too much.” A common finding was that the study participants tended to overload their courses with activities and needed to rethink the amount of work they assigned students and, consequently, themselves.

Question: Now that you delivered your first blended course and have experienced course and a half, what strategies can one use to streamline the course and help manage instructor workload to avoid course and a half?

2.  Re-examining course goals and objectives

When designing their hybrid courses, the research participants emphasized the importance of critically re-examining course goals and learning objectives, even if they had taught the same course previously in the traditional format. One said she was a “believer” in focusing on course goals: “What do you want them to learn and how do you want them to learn it?” The hybrid format demanded even more reflection because two learning “spaces” needed to be considered. One research participant said you can’t just “divide it [the course] in half” and another elaborated on this part of the course redesign process:

I went through and really thought about what are the learning goals of the course, what are the things that we do to lead to those goals, and then what are the best ways would each of those mini-goals best be facilitated, online or face-to-face.

Another instructor summarized, “Goals and objectives must come first in developing any course…I feel that connecting the online and face-to-face activities needed attention because they need coordination in order to be integrated into a unified whole.” When discussing course design, instructors concurred that it was “time consuming” but essential “because it is a conscious decision-making process” of deciding which lesson plans work best online or face-to-face. Findings indicate that faculty found that the process of reexamining their learning goals and objectives was critical to developing a successful hybrid course

Online or Face-to-Face

Redesigning a traditional course into a hybrid course compelled faculty to think through how best to use two learning spaces instead of just one. “I really just had to reconfigure the class to include, or to sort through, what I was going to do online and what I was going to do face-to-face.” After reflecting on their goals, the research participants used a variety of methods to decide which environment to use for which learning activities.

Instructors tended to use the online environment for work that students could do “on their own,” such as assessments, tutorials, readings, and quizzes. Some of the instructors who were new to hybrid teaching felt that it would be a "waste of face-to-face class time" to do these things in the classroom. Other instructors saved activities for the in-person class that required “interaction” and to address “issues or misconceptions that popped up in the online discussion.” For example, one instructor used the face-to-face environment to introduce a complex essay critique assignment. Then she followed up online by reading the students’ essays, answering critical reading questions, and drafting a summary. Face-to-face was also used to present visual information like film clips, provide demonstrations, conduct hands-on activities like labs, conduct group activities and student presentations, give lectures, answer questions, and give exams. Findings indicate that the majority of instructors used the face-to-face environment to present information needing context and explain interpretations to facilitate better student understanding. In contrast, the online environment was used for information that was independent in nature or was clearly conveyed and easily facilitated in the online environment

An essential component to a successful blend is a set of clear learning objectives, how those learning objectives are going to be assessed, and which environment (face-to-face or online) would be most effective. Successive iterations of a blended course should reconsider the language, aims, and focus of its learning objectives based on the demonstrable integration of online and face-to-face activities.   

Question: How can one identify and build upon the successful elements of learning objectives in the blended model? Specifically, was the learning environment (face-to-face or online) appropriate for the assigned activity and achievement of each learning objective? Did it provide the evidence or documentation that the learning objective was met?

3.  Building presence, enhancing connectivity, and building community

Many of the instructors talked about the importance of creating a “community of learners,” which is a well-known challenge in online education (Brufee, 1999; Harasim, Hiltz, Teles, & Turoff, 1998). To create this community, the research participants shared their experiences of establishing “social presence,” also known as a feeling of connection and community among individuals (Short, Williams, & Christie, 1976). One instructor summed up what many discovered:

A lot of people are afraid that replacing seat time with online is going to diminish the quality of the relationship – whether it is teacher-student or student-student. And actually I have to say from my experience it is contrary to that… I get more quality interactions and feedback from the students ... which then helps increase my connection to them.

Study findings indicate that when a positive climate is created, hybrid environments have the potential to increase and extend connectivity and to build relationships even more so than in traditional or online courses.

Connectivity Challenges

The biggest concern instructors feared when converting their traditional courses to the hybrid environment was the potential of losing the connection they had with students. One instructor who taught a freshman seminar explained that he had “withdrawals” from not being able to meet personally with each of his students as often as he did when he taught the same course face-to-face. Another undergraduate lecturer felt a sense of “panic at first” because she also was concerned about the lack of social interaction. Both instructors admitted that they needed more experience creating interactive discussions, particularly with freshmen who needed more attention. These instructors also noted that students seemed to “disengage” from discussions if they were given too much work. Others noted that “sometimes students disappear” online and that it can be tricky to get some students to participate. However, experienced hybrid instructors and faculty with online teaching experience were more at ease “encouraging people to ask questions of each other online” and getting students to share ideas. These instructors also found that their students were excited about logging in to see what people said. So while many felt it was important to “have some physical contact with an instructor,” they also were able to build connections through online discussions in between in-person meetings. When these connections were created, most felt that the communication increased in a hybrid course compared to traditional courses.

Question: Sometimes we can lose the connection and our ability as instructors to build presence in the mediated environment. Instructors need to develop skills and strategies to meet these needs in the blended format.  What are some ways one can successfully enhance social presence and connectedness with students?

4. Community Building

Although some of the instructors were concerned about losing the personal touch with students, others related how they were able to get to know their students even better in a hybrid course. The majority of the instructors said students were more conversational “and more open” online than they were in the classroom. Plus, students who normally did not speak up in class participated online. For example, when talking about personal subjects like dating, religion, and sexuality, the psychology instructor was surprised how “comfortable” students were sharing personal information. Many of the instructors also explained how these frank conversations started online and carried over into the classrooms where strong “friendships formed.” In addition, students “were more willing to participate in class” because they were “warmed up by the fact that they have already been contributing to the discussions online.” The three instructors who incorporated group work in their hybrid courses said that a sense of community also carried over when group members worked together, either face-to-face or online, and enhanced the interactions and productivity of the groups.

Question: Many times when we introduce a mediated environment, we find out course design needed more opportunity for collaborative learning for students to engage students and assist them in building peer networks.  Where can your course lends itself in assisting students in building community with other students? the instructor? and, the public?

5. Managing your time and staying organized

Findings indicate that managing hybrid courses forced instructors and students to become “more organized” and “prepared” than they had to be in a traditional course. The hybrid environment also added additional scheduling challenges as courses meet both online and face to-face. Although both faculty and students enjoyed the “flexibility” and the increased “personal contact,” navigating these dual-learning spaces did cause some challenges and confusion. As one instructor said, it can be hard “to keep straight” when the class is meeting in person or online. To create one seamless course, the hybrid instructor’s role needs to expand to include unique scheduling and organizational tasks (Sands, 2002). The following are the major faculty and student benefits and challenges of the managerial role as shared by the research participants; they involve course scheduling, course organization, and student time management.

Course Scheduling

A major decision for faculty was the frequency and pattern of scheduling for face-to-face and virtual activities. Some faculty still met with their students weekly, while others only met face-to-face a few times in a semester. When asked how they decided when to meet as a class, reasons varied, including “it depended on the content,” the need to schedule around other obligations and courses, and a desire to give students an opportunity to work on a project online between classes. The frequency and pattern of course meetings varied greatly for the study participants. For some instructors, the class meeting schedule “was different every week” while others convened on a regular schedule every week equaling half of the original course time.

While both faculty and students appreciated not having to meet in person as often, many instructors commented that it was often difficult to manage the online workload. Comments included “there is so much to read” and “it was difficult for me everyday to get online because of my busy schedule.” Faculty explained that it is important to set aside time to focus on the online components. One instructor explained, “It is a matter of self-discipline, to sit down and just read it or do it or set a time block aside where I am going to read posts and be committed to it.” Despite these initial challenges, as instructors gained more experience, these scheduling issues diminished over the semester.

Student Time Management

Student benefits and challenges mirrored those of the faculty. Several instructors noted that hybrid offers “flexibility for over-burdened students” and for those with family and job responsibilities. However, like faculty, students had more difficulty committing time to online work than they did for “those 50 minutes in class.” Some students viewed only the face-to-face portions as the real class, and “ignore the responsibility of doing all the other work.” One instructor noted that students “have twice as many opportunities to miss an assignment” because they are responsible for both in-class and online activities. “They [students] have a lot of things to keep track of.” Others put a positive spin on this challenge and felt that the hybrid format should go beyond teaching students content to teaching “important life skills” of time management, self-discipline, and organization. One instructor said, “A challenge and benefit for students is that they needed to learn to better manage their time.” Instructors said it is important to clarify that it is the student’s responsibility to “check the course page” for weekly announcements and assignments.

In addition to helping students better manage their time, instructors noted how working online also made the face-to-face time “more serious and more valuable.” One instructor noted how prepared students were for the face-to-face class after participating online: “When they came into class on Tuesday nights, they were really focused…. I think it [the hybrid format] made that time more productive.” Scheduling flexibility and time management were the benefits as well as the challenges for students.

Question: Many students enroll in blended courses because of the flexibility associated with time shifting. At the same time, they may overbook their schedules or not allocate time for studying. What strategies did students employ to balance their schedules and manage their in- and out-of-class time effectively?  What effective instructional strategies can one employ to help students stay on track?  Are there any additional strategies one could implement the next time the course is delivered to help students stay organized, assessed student readiness, and manage student expectations?

Picciano, A.G. & Dziuban, C., Editors (2006). Blended learning: Research perspectives. Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium.

http://sloanconsortium.org/node/921

Activity: Taking the Next Step with Perfecting the Blend

For this breakout session, we will ask you to respond to one of the five questions in a group at your table.  In responding to your question, consider the elements of the question that you find intriguing, problematic or surprising?

While you are crafting your response, we invite you to post your responses to the questions at the following wiki space:

http://blend12nextquestions.wikispaces.com/

After you’ve had a chance to make some notes to yourself and post them to the wiki space, we’ll invite participants to present their ideas and reasoning to the large group. Each presentation will be followed by a brief discussion and feedback from the facilitators and the group as a whole.

Ten Questions for MOOC Design

Ten Questions for MOOC Design

This is developed as a resource for our faculty development program at the University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee Learning Technology Center to assist those interested in designing and delivering a MOOC in planning and preparation.  This is an adaptation of our previous 10 questions for blended and online as well as more previous work on designing, delivering, and making MOOCs by Siemens and by Schroeder.    

1. MOOCs should be designed and delivered by those who have expertise and personal interest in a certain topic that would be appealing to participants for learning and discussion.  

What topic are you considering in delivering as a MOOC?  Why do you believe MOOC is the appropriate dissemination and deliver mode for this topic? Is there a demand for this topic?    

2. MOOCs can be massive, but the interpretation of what is massive can differ.  No matter the extent to which your course is massive, you need a topic that has some demand and has a target audience.  

What audience will be suitable for the topic you will provide through a MOOC?  

3. The individual that designs the course should have expertise in the topic (teaching or research) and should be “present” in the course.  Many times the design and facilitation of MOOCs is best done with a peer or group.  

Who will design and teach the MOOC?  What is the time frame for design and delivery? How will presence and voice be established?

4. The outcomes of those who participate in the MOOC need to be determined in order to evaluate whether the course was effective. Also, it is important that participants are assessed and receive frequent feedback on the strengths and weakness in their learning.   

What will participants learn in this MOOC or what are your desired results?  What evidence or documentation will participants provide, if any, to illustrate they have achieved the desired learning outcomes or results?  How will participants receive feedback on their learning?  

5. Although some MOOCs (MOOCx) tend to focus only on content delivery, a truly effective learning experience requires interactivity, communication, and community.  

What spaces of interaction can you identify for participants (centralized or distributed, synchronous or asynchronous)? Who will facilitate these interactions?

6. The content in a MOOC should be a starting point for learning conversations, not the exclusive intent of the course.

What content is needed for participants to complete the activities and achieve the learning outcomes?  Do you have the skills and software to create or curate the content or where can you gather these needed resources?  

7. Students sometimes have difficulty acclimating to the course site and to other instructional technologies you may be using for online activities.

What challenges do you anticipate? What proactive steps can you take to assist students to become familiar with your site and those instructional technologies?

8. When working online, students frequently have problems scheduling their work and managing their time, and understanding the implications of a MOOC as related to learning.

What do you plan to do to help your students address time management and organization skills?

9.  Unlike traditional online courses you may teach at the university where students of the university need to take your class in order to complete a degree, a MOOC requires you to promote and share.  

How will you promote your MOOC?

10. Your course should have a lifecycle of evaluation, before, during, and after.  

What methods will you use to evaluate your course before it starts?  How will you gather student feedback during and after the course?  

Other considerations:

How would this MOOC meet the needs of current, future, or past UWM students?  How would it be available to and to promote the reputation of UWM among your peers and colleagues? How will this MOOC align with institutional mission and initiatives (recruitment, enrollments)?

Who will be providing student feedback?  Are the practices scalable to massively open? Are rubrics or exam banks already in existence?  Would it be possible for students to receive badges, certificate, or credit?

Do you need to create the content or can you curate content already in existing in open education resource repositories or others MOOCs?  Is the content interactive and engaging? Can the learners create and share content?  

What new learning opportunities will arise as a result of the massively open course?  Will these produce artifacts of sense making or the evidence you require for assessment?

What specific technologies will you use for the course? If students need help with technology later in the course, where will they receive support?  Are these practices scalable?  

What is your quality improvement plan?  How will you know your MOOC was effective?  What is your research plan to evaluate your MOOCs effectiveness?  

Resources:

Schroeder, R., Making a Mooc
https://sites.google.com/site/makingmooc/

Siemens, G., Designing and Running a MOOC in 9 Easy Steps
http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2012/09/04/designing-and-running-a-mooc-in-9-easy-steps/

University of Wisconsin -  Milwaukee Learning Technology Center, 10 Question for Hybrid/Blended Course Design
http://www4.uwm.edu/ltc/hybrid/faculty_resources/questions.cfm

Tanya Joosten. tjoosten@uwm.edu, @tjoosten
Learning Technology Center
University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee

GVSU Teaching & Learning with Technology Symposium

My keynote, The digital future: Who is driving the bus?

Higher education is undergoing a rapid transformation due to changes in societal interests and values. As educators, we must be responsive to these changes and look to develop strategies to best meet the needs of our students inside and outside of the classroom. We are bombarded with new technologies and practices to aid us in our efforts, including blended learning, learner analytics, MOOCs, open education resources (OER), mobile technologies, social media, gamification, and more. How do we decide what is right for us and our students? I will discuss considerations derived from these trends that will help us design our future.

http://www.gvsu.edu/it/idel/tanya-joosten-2012-2013-symposium-keynote-presentation-23.htm

Images retrieved from: https://twitter.com/awolber/status/314436154499944448/photo/1

Who is driving the bus? from Tanya Joosten

More about the symposium, http://www.gvsu.edu/it/idel/teaching-and-learning-with-technology-symposium-13.htm









Pre-session: Blended teaching and learning

GVSU Blended Teaching and Learning from Tanya Joosten

10 questions for blended teaching and learning:
http://t.co/Z3CnY1FEl2

Companies making money from online students

I recently was interviewed by the local news.  Concerns about online cheating is about as irritating to me as Concerns about FERPA and social media.  #drink

Although they, of course, didn't capture who I was or what I did correctly, the main point I was trying to make was is that at UWM we design our *own* courses.  I uniquely design each course I teach based on my learning objectives, research background and interest, my students, etc.  Also, I have varied assessments, including online discussions, quizzes, group projects, individual research projects, exams, and more.  These assessments are all designed based on *my* learning objectives and content.  It is not a "canned" course, and it would be a challenge to "cheat." 

Another point is that students, in the end, understand the value of a dollar and what they are paying for their education.  They are going to decide exactly what they get out of the course.  Cheating has been taking place in education since the start of the time.  Just because a course is online does not mean these rates are any higher than a f2f lecture class.  

In general, I really wish people would stop alluding to the fact that technology *causes* bad behavior...human choices cause bad behavior, not the technology.  We all have agency...the ability to act otherwise - note Giddens' reference ;)

In the last month, I had two reporters trying to insinuate that the technology caused lying (see Manti Teo blog post) and now cheating, which will get me on my internal locus of control rant...look out!

Well, enjoy!  

tj

Reference:

Graham, S., & Terry, J. (February 1st, 2013). Companies making money from online students--by doing their work for them.  Today's TMJ4, NBC Affiliate, and 620WTMJ.  Retrieved from: http://www.todaystmj4.com/features/iteam/189437201.html and http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/189437201.html. [quoted]

My Keynote, eLearning 2013

I was very excited to be invited to speak at eLearning 2013 (#elearning13). Below you can click on the first image to learn more about the ITC event. Or, you can click on the second image to view the mediasite recording, which includes a highlight from the Mayor of San Antonio! Finally, you can view the slides from shlideshare. Enjoy!

E learning13 keynote from Tanya Joosten

You can view an archive of the event by searching #elearning13 on Twitter, or check out my Storify of the Tweets at: http://sfy.co/hFEB.

Guiding Social Media at Our Institutions by Tanya Joosten, Laura Pasquini, and Lindsey Harness

"The pedagogical benefit of social media use beyond its application as a motivational technique continues to be unaddressed by many universities."

INTRODUCTION
Given the increasing use of social media in our society and the growing number of individuals preferring to use social media over other communications tools (e.g., e-mail), many educators are examining how to effectively implement social media on their campuses. Many institutions are using social media to communicate with their communities. They are also looking to use social media to engage students both inside and outside the classroom. These institutions are making decisions on how to support and encourage social media use while considering the costs and implications.

Read the full article at:
http://www.scup.org/asset/65460/PHEV41N2_Article_Guiding-Social-Media.pdf

View my interview on SCUP's Mojo regarding the article:



'via Blog this'

Guess who is going to SXSWedu?

There are a couple events that are mainstream social events that have an event for educators, which I have wanted to attend for a few years.  The first was the Consumer Electronics Show (CES), and I got to go to this year's Higher Ed Tech Summit at CES last month.  Now, I am so lucky to be able to not only attend SCSWedu, but sit on a panel with some others and discuss social media - thanks, to Laura Pasquini.  Anyway, I just thought I would share my excitement and let you all know more in case you make it down to the event.

Cheers!
tj

Learn more at:

http://schedule.sxswedu.com/events/event_EDUP15497
http://schedule.sxswedu.com/speakers/speaker_604874

My comments - Manti Te'o dating debacle sparks local reaction | CBS 58 | Local News

Manti Te'o dating debacle sparks local reaction | CBS 58 | Local News: "Manti Te'o dating debacle sparks local reaction"

Check out my interview on deception and social media.  It goes something like "Social media author Tanya Joosten... " 

Although the reporter wanted me to discuss why people lie, my point is that people have been deceiving other people since the start of time.  Technology is just a medium that facilitates human behavior.  It does allow us based on the leanness of the medium  and the media characteristics (Daft & Lengel, 1986) to put forth an identity that may differ from our own.  This same leanness or lack of cues can lead to increase liking or hyperpersonal communication (Walther, 2007), which can be advantageous when developing a relationship online.

We cannot blame technology because humans make bad choices and choose to deceive or to cheat or to bully or whatever the phenomenon.  We must have an internal locus of control.  Individuals who have the propensity to demonstrate deviant behavior will do so possibly in despite of the medium.  

We, as a society, seem to take a dystopian view on technology.   For example, students have been cheating in large lecture exams for decades.  Students write notes on their hands, have a cheat sheet, use nonverbal codes to exchange answers, look over another student's shoulder, but we seem to be more concerned with the fidelity of testing these days because it is taking place online.  Another example, we hear about individuals blaming their extramarital affair or their divorce on Facebook.  Someone was not fulfilled in their marriage and made a *choice* to go outside of that marriage.  Whether online or f2f, students and individuals make a choice to cheat.  

Previously in an interview, I was asked to comment on a situation where bullying via social media led to a student's suicide.  Once again, trying to control technology or social media is not going to alter one's aptitude for inappropriate human behavior.  We as parents, as educators, and as society need to teach our children to be good human beings no matter what the medium.  We should focus on punishing and controlling the behavior, not the technology.  We also need to teach individuals to set their own guidelines in using technology and being critical consumers.  

My oldest daughter took herself off Facebook for a few weeks at the end of this past semester because she felt she was distracted by it.  She could have blamed Facebook when she got her grades, but instead she made a decision to set limitations to change her behavior.  I am very proud of her.  We all should be able to do the same.      

On the other hand, I am unsure why a college football player's experience with developing  relationship online or being deceived online is sports news much less national news.  However, it does inform the idea that we need to be teaching our students, including college athletes,  21st century literacy skills around social media and to be critical analyzers of technology and its impact on social interactions.  Too bad Manti Te'o was not in my Human Communication and Technology course.   

References:

Daft, R.L. & Lengel, R.H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science 32(5), 554-571. Retrieved from:
http://home.business.utah.edu/actme/7410/Daft%20and%20Lengel.pdf

Walther, J. (2007). Selective self-presentation in computer-mediated communication:
Hyperpersonal dimensions of technology, language, and cognition.  Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 2538-2557. Retrieved from:
http://newmedia.cityu.edu.hk/COM5108/readings/Walther%202006.pdf




'via Blog this'