Friday, August 31, 2012

Developing small group activities for online and blended courses


Developing Small Group Work in Online and Blended Courses 

Considerations in small group pedagogy


Group work in the online environment facilitates the building of peer networks and online community, which are noted aspects of a quality online course. In this workshop we will further discuss the benefits to using groups in online and blended courses. Also, we will discuss overcoming challenges to small group work, creating small groups, developing small group learning activities, and assessing group performance.

Why use groups in blended and online courses?
·         Aids in building learning community
·         Provides students with an opportunity to apply concepts and theories
·         Allows students to develop skills that are representative of real work life
·         Fosters active learning

Challenges to online group work
·         Social loafing
·         Transaction costs
·         Student self-management

Accountability
·         Frequent feedback
·         Individual time and effort - peer assessment
·         Team performance – product or process (rubrics)

Issues to consider in group creation, forming and managing groups
·         Group size by task, project completion or discussion
·         Heterogeneous groups for better group performance
·         Instructor driven for diversity of ideas
·         Team-building activities for cohesion


Types of group learning activities promoting learning and team development

·         Charter Development
·         Project Teams
·         Case Studies
·         Simulations and Role Playing
·         Audio or Video Analysis
·         Debates or Negotiations


Checklist: Developing effective small group learning activities


Group activities should be engaging and focus on higher order learning
1.      What aspects of the content lend themselves to group activities?
2.      How can the activity utilize the many experiences of students into making a higher quality product than working individually?
3.      How can the activity allow students to work together to maximize their own and each other's learning?
4.      How can the activity allow students to search for understanding, solutions, or meanings, or creating a product?
5.      How does the activity meet a course objective? Do your learning objectives for the course including working as a team? Working collaboratively?
6.      What are the goals of the group activity?
7.      Is the activity too challenging for an individual to complete?

Group activities should facilitate learning community
1.      How can the activity allow for group discussion and resolution (if possible)?
2.      How can the activity be structured to ensure participation by all members?
3.      How can the activity provide an opportunity for students to develop a connection with each other?
4.      How does the activity promote peer teaching/learning?

Group activities require student support in self-management
1.      What activities will you include for students to build trust and cohesion (e.g., group charter, team picts, team blog, etc.)?
2.      What is the timetable for completion?  Have you taken into account time dependent on the medium (discussion board, synchronous meetings, etc.)?
3.      Are the tasks scaffolded into manageable chunks? Is there frequent feedback opportunities?
4.      What technologies will be used?  (Asynchronous Discussions? Drop box? Locker? Synchronous Chat? Others?)

Group activities require individual and group accountability
1.      How will accountability be built into the process?
2.      Is individual and group performance assessed (e.g., peer evaluation, group grade on product)?
3.      Is reflection built into the activity (self-assessment)?

Recommended scholarly small group resources

Palloff, R.M. & Pratt, K. (1999).  Building learning communities in cyberspace.  San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Michaelsen, L.K., Knight, A.B., & Fink, L. D. (2004.) Team-based learning: A transformative use of small group in college teaching.  Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

Barkley, E., Cross, P., & Major, C.H. (2004). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Developing a small group activity using backwards design


1.      What do I want my students to be able to do (i.e., not just “know”) achieving higher order learning?



2.      What evidence or documentation do I require to demonstrate my students’ achievement of these desired results? Individually?  As a group?



3.      What group learning activity will produce this evidence or documentation?



4.      What materials and resources are best suited to assist students in accomplish these goals?
(a)    What communication tools with the students use?
(b)   How will you facilitate interactions?
(c)    How much time will they need to get to know each other, develop a charter, accomplish the tasks, etc.?
(d)   Will you provide a sample product?



Tuesday, August 28, 2012

MOOCs, online and blended teaching and learning

Online Learning MOOCs 

http://t.co/0c3c2HlY Shroeder’s Making Moocs, including MOOC Planning Checklist
http://t.co/XYjnkfWT Chronicle article
https://t.co/alNJ9ORn Badges
http://ocwconsortium.org  Open Courseware 
http://t.co/f6xmG88Y Mooc YouTube Video

Blended Learning MOOCs

The University of Central Florida (UCF) announces the second offering of its popular MOOC (massive open online course) for blended learning faculty and designers: BlendKit2012. Based around the open-licensed BlendKit Course instructional materials contained within thehttp://BlendedLearningToolkit.org web site, BlendKit2012 will run as a five-week cohort (from Monday, September 24 to Monday, October 29, 2012) facilitated by UCF’s Dr. Kelvin Thompson and Dr. Linda Futch. The goal of BlendKit2012 is to provide assistance in designing and developing your blended learning course via a consideration of key issues related to blended learning and practical step-by-step guidance in helping you produce actual materials for your blended course (i.e., from design documents through creating content pages to peer review feedback at your own institution). Unlike many traditional courses, registrants are encouraged to select the course components they find relevant as they participate at one of several engagement levels (i.e., completer, participant, auditor).  Course components include regular communications from facilitators, weekly readings, hands-on tasks, a variety of real time and asynchronous interaction opportunities, and weekly webinars with experienced blended learning instructors.

Registration is free of charge.  For more information or to register, please visit: http://bit.ly/blendkit2012.

Designing a MOOC


Designing and running a MOOC (in 9 easy steps), George Siemens
http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2012/09/04/designing-and-running-a-mooc-in-9-easy-steps/

Gamification MOOC 
https://class.coursera.org/gamification-2012-001


Promoting entrepreneurship in mobile development


What are other campus models?

Stakeholders:

Who are current corporate partners working with the different academic units or other units on campus in entrepreneurial ventures?

Who are the leaders at UWM: Art&Design, Engineering, Web Services (UITS), SOIS

Who is here? Film, Research, LTC,

Who else should be at the table? SCE, Lubar/Entrepreneurial, Fresh Water Sciences, Eva/Libraries, start-ups in MKE

Infrastructure:

Digital repository

What are other digital repositories support campus teaching/research entrepreneurial efforts?

Projects being conducted on campus or in planning where collaborators are needed (funding, corporate
partners, students, faculty, and others)

Profiles -- what are your areas of research, interest, ideas

Potential funding agencies

Physical space -- Learning/research entrepreneurial commons

What are other collaborative research spaces being developed on campus?

Support for faculty and students

Advising of these students
Support with evaluation/research of "research" or development
Faculty support groups
Student support groups

Processes:

Curriculum development:

Certificate program, 3+ classes
Mobile app classes, web classes, entrepreneur classes, what other skills (team skills, research)?

Evaluation:

What are our objectives?
How do we know if we have been successful?
What are our metrics?

Campus engagement and communication:

Brownbags
Workshops
Guest speakers



Move towards UWM's digital future


Today, I have attended the UWM Tech/Mobile/Start-up retreat.  Although this is one initiative (actually, an amalgamation of several) at the University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee campus, it should be considered as a potential model for implementing plans and meeting goals outlined by the UWM Digital Future planning.

As our speakers, Michael Hostad, Quinn Madson, Lee Ann Garrison, & Ilya Avdeev, discussed their current projects on campus, it became obvious that there *are* programs on UWM that illustrate precisely what efforts of the digital future were proposing (see images below of their slides linking to the strategic goals outlined below).  

Consequently, it made me realize that there were key components not explicitly highlighted in the proposed digital future plans surrounding the idea of students creators and producers of the digital technologies of our future, and courses and community organizations as partners.

My key takeaways...

It is not just about promoting the use of digital technologies for active learning, it is about creating digital technologies through active learning experiences where students ability to be active, creative, critical and collaborative is enhanced by their experience *producing* a range of digital technology solutions.  These solutions can be built by the support and for the use of the UWM campus, community agencies, and local organizations/corporations.

from Lee Ann Garrison, 
http://www4.uwm.edu/secu/faculty/standing/apbc/agendas/10-11/05-05-11PSOAdesignresearchinstitute.pdf




from Ilya Avdeev, 
http://www.uwmstartupchallenge.com/






From the UWM Digital Futures: Teaching and Learning Plan
Retrievable from: http://www4.uwm.edu/acad_aff/digitalfuture/recommendations-teachinglearning.pdf

1. Strategic Goal:
Promote the use of digital technologies for active learning* across campus to positively affect student engagement, learning, and retention, with attention to access for all. Active learning involves students in more than passive listening; they are engaged in activities such as reading, discussing, and interacting with material; see http://www.ntlf.com/html/lib/bib/91@9dig.htm). 

Bonwell and Eison (1991) identify active learning as learning in which less emphasis is placed on information transmission and greater emphasis is placed on developing student skills through engaging activities requiring high order thinking. Students receive more immediate feedback in order to increase their learning. The pedagogical benefits of active learning in higher education are well noted (Adler, 1982; Bligh, 2000; Bransford, et al., 2000; Chickering and Gamson, 1987; McKeachie, et. al., 1987; Silberman, 1996). There has been a transformation of courses across many disciplines and course levels using digital technologies to implement active learning strategies and examining the positive impact on engagement, learning, and retention.

Actions:
1.1. Highlight and promote best practices and model strategies for using digital technologies to enable active learning across campus for all types of courses, e.g., face@to@face, blended and online

1.3.  Promote  pedagogical  strategies  facilitating  active  learning  through  the  use  of  emerging technologies,  such as mobile  technologies,  social  networking, collaborative  technologies,  high fidelity simulations, student@created content, e@texts, and third@party vendor course materials:


*Proposed addition to digital future plan: Promote the use *AND CREATION* of digital technologies faciltiating active learning


4. Strategic Goal: 
Improve digital access for all students and increase student preparedness to participate in 
digital learning and discovery at UWM and beyond. UWM needs to provide incoming students with mechanisms (through the General Education curriculum and coursework in the major) to expand their  digital literacy to be effective learners and technologically proficient graduates. All UWM graduates should understand how to learn about and critically use new and emerging digital technologies for creating and engaging effectively with social, academic, civic, business, and research communities, such that UWM becomes known for graduates who have the abilities to be active, creative, critical, and collaborative users of a range of digital technologies.

4.2. Enhance students’ ability to be active, creative, critical, and collaborative users* of a range of digital technologies in preparation for the digital future:

*Proposed addition to digital future plan: Enhance students’ ability to be active, creative, critical, and collaborative *PRODUCERS* of a range of digital technologies in preparation for the digital future:

5. Strategic Goal: 
Meet the challenge of a digital future by increasing UWM’s capacity to adjust its degree array in 
response to new trends in scholarship and societal and regional needs. Higher education will be impacted by a more competitive marketplace (for@profit education increase of 9%in 2009), a changing marketplace (globalization, home schooling, charter schooling, and other educational alternatives), and other factors, including disruptive technologies, which have already impacted other marketplaces (newspaper, music, television, and book@publishing industries) influencing student expectations (see Katz, 2010). In practical terms, this means differentiating UWM from other higher education providers. To the extent that our academic program array is current (reflecting UWM’s mission as a research university) and flexible (meeting the needs of today’s busy learners and working adults) we will be prepared for the digital future. 

Actions:
5.1. Make it easier to develop interdisciplinary academic programs
5.2. Seek out corporate and community input* to evaluate how UWM current program offerings map to community, state, national, and international needs.

*Proposed addition to digital future plan: Seek out corporate and community *COLLABORATIONS* and partners in programs/curricular that produce works that can be used by UWM community partners 


Thursday, August 23, 2012

The next course design (in progress)


Brainstorming

Note -- collaborators at all institutions are welcome, if you steal my ideas, karma will get you... :)


Blended

Study 1:
Does supplementing face-to-face instruction with online instruction enhance learning?

For the 23 Category 2 contrasts that compared blended conditions of online plus face-toface learning with face-to-face instruction alone, the mean effect size of +0.35 was
significant (p < .0001). Blends of online and face-to-face instruction, on average, had
stronger learning outcomes than did face-to-face instruction alone.

http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf 

Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in 
Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and 
Review of Online Learning Studies
U.S. Department of Education

Study 2: 


As for “flipping the classroom” -- that is, banishing the lecture and focusing precious class time on group projects and other forms of active learning -- a decisive majority of professors seem to be on board. Asked their feelings on the notion of “changing the faculty role to spend less time lecturing and more time coaching students,” 69 percent said they were excited more than fearful.

Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/survey/digital-faculty-professors-and-technology-2012#ixzz24THkGVoD
Inside Higher Ed


Self-paced (Upace) course


Study 1:

http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/u-pace-facilitating-academic-success-all-students
U-Pace: Facilitating Academic Success for All Students

By Diane M. Reddy, Raymond Fleming, Laura E. Pedrick, Katie A. Ports, Jessica L. Barnack-Tavlaris, Alicia M. Helion, and Rodney A. Swain

The U-Pace instructional approach combines self-paced, mastery-based learning with instructor-initiated Amplified Assistance in an online learning environment.
Extensive evaluation showed that, compared to conventional instruction approaches, U-Pace instruction facilitated greater learning and greater academic success for all students in Introduction to Psychology courses.
In terms of resources, U-Pace requires only a learning management system (such as Blackboard, Desire2Learn, or Moodle).
U-Pace can be applied in any course or discipline, and resources to help instructors adopt the U-Pace approach are freely available.


Game elements
     Level 1, Level 2
     Badges
     Competition
     Traps, Re-ups/recharge
     Second chances, additional lives

Learner analytics to promote game elements

Competency based -- tied to D2L competency tool, criterion based testing

Build Community
Social media, FB, Google Hangout
Opportunities for social learning
Include info on how MOOC communities are evolving
Advising

D2L
Intelligent Agents
Conditional Releases
Coursebuilder
Competencies
Rubrics

Content map, exam blue print, competencies, pyschometricaly sound item banks
3 Taxonomies
Rasch Model
Criterion referenced testing
PValue, Point biserial
http://professorjoosten.blogspot.com/2012/08/is-your-exam-measuring-what-it-is.html
http://measurementresearch.com/media/evalguidelines.pdf

Open authoring texts, under creative commons

Target courses:
100 level courses
foundation knowledge

Other practices:


Text+media does lead to more effective learning.
Asynchronous does lead to more effective learning.
Instructor driven and collaborative work does lead to more effective learning (Independent learning does not).
Feedback does lead to more effective learning.


See: http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf
Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in 
Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and 
Review of Online Learning Studies
U.S. Department of Education


Looking for funding....from where?
US Dept of Ed

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Book Review: Social Media for Educators


Please read: Book Review: Social Media for Educators, August 21, 2012 by Laura Pasquini

About Laura Pasquini: A PhD student & #HigherEd pro at #UNT @ExploringMajors collaborating & learning w/ #AcAdv #SAtech #EdTech @BreakDrink (#CTCX) & editor of the @LPQuarterly


Follow @laurapasquini


'via Blog this'

Friday, August 17, 2012

Learner analytics (in progress)

BRAINSTORMING, VISIONING -- An effective model for learner analytics

What is everyone doing? What should we be doing?

Variables

Input --

Age, returning adults vs new generations
Minority + First generation college students
Others

(careful when reporting not to marginalize, ethical reporting)
What happens when the majority of minority students are identified as at risk when the reliability of the logarithm is only .7

Process --

Student behaviors in LMS, frequency vs duration in LMS course site, in area of cite (content, grades, discussions, quizzes, groups, etc.)

Discussions/Communication: Social network analysis -- how many people are you interacting with, how long are your posts (word freq), duration/time in forums reading or ?

Student behaviors in f2f class, attendance, grade/performance on in-class assignments

Course design, objective evaluation by 3rd party using a rubric 2.) Student survey data of course design

Output --

Data warehouse: Student grades/performance/success, "C or better," or..
In LMS -- Grades: overall, exams, quizzes, other assignments
Data warehouse: Retention/attrition, drop/withdrawal rates at what point?

Survey data --
Student reporting of perceived learning, performance
Student perceptions of satisfaction

Instructor reporting of perceived students' learning, performance, satisfaction
Instructor perceptions of satisfaction


Methods

Compare retention/attrition to norm references group

Performance -- pre/post implementation of analytics

Multiple regression models

Logarithm - are they reliable?  how are weights determine?  how is partial data addressed (medium or ?)?

Ethics - what if a student is rightly or wrongly identified as "At risk," or how is student and faculty performance impacted?

For example, “The increasing collection and analysis of data on teaching and learning on a course-by-course basis” garnered the most enthusiasm of any of the excitement/fear questions in the survey, with 74 percent of professors saying it is, on balance, a good thing.

The counterargument has been that this trend could lead to an overreliance on data-based metrics to assess not only student performance but teacher performance, leading to a No Child Left Behind-like regime at many colleges, especially public ones. But the vast majority of professors seem to think that the advantages of Big Data in the classroom outweigh the hazards.

Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/survey/digital-faculty-professors-and-technology-2012#ixzz24TH067ou 

Inside Higher Ed


Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Blended learning with UW Madison





Course site access:
https://uwm.courses.wisconsin.edu/d2l/lms/content/manage/topicsmodules_list.d2l?ou=319757
username/password: hybfac

JALN article, defining blended
http://sloanconsortium.org/jaln/v10n3/blended-learning-implications-growth-and-access

Tanya - Defining learning blog post
http://professorjoosten.blogspot.com/2009/12/defining-blended-learning.html


Faculty video cases, Simmons
http://at.simmons.edu/blendedlearning/learnhow/simmons_case_studies.php


UWM Resources
UWM hybrid site http://hybrid.uwm.edu
UWM blended presentations https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/groups/sa/ltc/www/blendedpresentations/
UWM online and blended programs http://online.uwm.edu
Accessing my course info http://D2L.uwm.edu username/password hybfac


CATS
http://tep.uoregon.edu/resources/newteach/fifty_cats.pdf 
http://www.ntlf.com/html/lib/bib/assess.htm
http://www.pccua.edu/assessment/classroom_assessment_techniques.htm
http://daley.ccc.edu/academic/pdf/Classroom%20Assessment%20Techniques.pdf

Designing a Learning Module
http://professorjoosten.blogspot.com/2010/08/developing-learning-module-discussions.html
http://professorjoosten.blogspot.com/2009/11/learning-module-checklist.html

Assessment Plan Checklist
http://professorjoosten.blogspot.com/2011/08/assessment-plan-checklist.html

Scavenger Hunt PPT and Worksheet
https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/groups/sa/ltc/FacultyResources/

Course evaluation checklist
http://professorjoosten.blogspot.com/2010/05/course-evaluation-checklist.html

Course evaluation guide
https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/groups/sa/ltc/CourseEvaluation/Final%20peer%20evaluation%20handbook/

Syllabus checklist
http://professorjoosten.blogspot.com/2010/08/syllabus-checklist-for-blended-and.html

Sunday, August 12, 2012

Distance Teaching and Learning Conference Presentations for 2012

#dtl2012 presentations:




Resources:
http://uwmmobilelearning.wikispaces.com
http://uwmsocialmedia.wikispaces.com
http://clickers.uwm.edu


Session Title:   Exploring mobile technologies to improve student learning

Presenter(s): Tanya Joosten and Dylan Barth

Number of Evaluations:  56

SCALE: 5 = EXCELLENT, 4 = VERY GOOD, 3 = GOOD, 2 = FAIR, 1 = POOR

ITEM, MEAN SCORE

1) Presenter knowledge, 4.67

2) Clarity of presentation, 4.53

3) Usefulness of the information, 4.40

4) Addressed participant questions, 4.42

5) Overall presentation rating, 4.49





Resources:
http://uwsecondlife.wikispaces.com
http://uwmsecondlife.wikispaces.com
http://uwmsecondlife.blogspot.com

YouTube videos of use:

2008

2011

Social Media for Educators
http://www.amazon.com/Social-Media-Educators-Strategies-Jossey-Bass/dp/1118118286/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_1


Session Title:   Faculty development and the impact on education in virtual worlds

Presenter(s): Tanya Joosten

Number of Evaluations:  31

SCALE: 5 = EXCELLENT, 4 = VERY GOOD, 3 = GOOD, 2 = FAIR, 1 = POOR

ITEM, MEAN SCORE

1) Presenter knowledge, 4.80

2) Clarity of presentation, 4.54

3) Usefulness of the information, 4.25

4) Addressed participant questions, 4.48

5) Overall presentation rating, 4.60





Is your exam measuring what it is supposed to?

I have put together a series of blog posts from my other life as a research associate doing psychometric research and exam development.

Many of us look to publisher exam banks which tend to consist of poorly developed items. I urge you all to review your exam items to make sure you are truly measuring students knowledge and skills rather than their ability to take a test.

 Further, there is a bit here on item statistics to help you improve exams already delivered.

I hope these help you all improve the quality of your exams and students satisfaction with your exams.

Blog posts are on the LTC blog at: http://uwmltc.org/?cat=470      

A presentation is at: