Relationship between Learning Management System Self-Efficacy, Situational Interest, Self-Regulation, and Learning Engagement of Online Learners presented by SANGHOON PARK, University of South Florida; and Jung Lim, University of South Florida
Dissertations in an Online Doctoral Program: Mentoring, Challenges, and Strategies by Swapna Kumar, University of Florida; Catherine Coe, University of Florida
An Analysis of Professional Practice Dissertations in an Online Educational Technology Program Kara
Dawson, University of Florida; Swapna Kumar, University of Florida
Breakfast with the Champions: Charles Hodges and Thomas Reeves
LMS and Learner Engagement
Instruments to investigate further
LMSSE (learning management system self-efficacy) – it’s a measure of how well the students can use the LMS
Research idea from the table for students working on theses and dissertations. Have a research fair where the students share their research every year… whether it’s their early idea idea or anywhere along the way to dissertation proposal to defending. Gives them practice in telling others about their research.
Self efficacy is very context dependent. Not just one instrument. Instrument will probably need to be revised if you select one.
You’ve heard of a cMOOC and an xMOOC, how about a pMOOC? Problem Based MOOC – making something for real clients. Thomas Reeves worked with colleagues in Australia to create a MOOC where participants were building OERs. Read about it in MOOCs: Let’s get REAL.
As always, when I work with Barb, I learn something new or find new concepts to ponder. I appreciate the partnership that allows for continued learning!
Notes, Ideas & Resources
Here are some notes, interesting ideas, and resources that came out of the workshop:
Conversation: Is constructionism a philosophy or a learning theory?
Remember: interaction is the process, and intersubjectivity is the product created when citing sources and peers in peer responses to synthesize new knowledge
We created synchronous intersubjectivity in the introductions – the participants talked to each other, and then came up with a table name and introduced the table (as opposed to just individual introductions)
Sentence starters can assist students in creating responses at higher levels – i.e. “I see it another way”. Accountable talk is a source for additional sentence starts.
When teaching adult learners, it is important to include their experience in the discussion prompt
For discussion prompts in the STEM fields, have students share how they solved the problem. There is a right answer, but there are different ways of getting there. They can learn from each other’s methods of problem solving.
It seems also that creating more structure and direction for peer responses would help. Some of the structures from this Critical Thinking site could be helpful for requirements for peer responses.
Tip for facilitators: use the IAM phase and try to work at phase 3 – modeling for the students making connections between the different peer responses.
I’m still mulling over the tendency to write discussion requirements about logistics (1 initial post, 2 replies, post by Wed, etc.) vs. the possibilities around writing discussion requirements that are content/intersubjectivity based.
F2F teaching techniques such as group roles, fishbowl discussions, 360 evals are all useful online as well.
I’m new to AECT, and some colleagues recommended that I attend the Breakfast with Champions on Thursday morning. I’m also new to higher ed educational technology. AECT seems to consider itself THE organization for educational technology and instructional design for higher education. My take is that it is much more research-based and less cool-tool-based than ISTE; more like AERA in it’s research and theory focus.
Because my training is in K12 ed tech, online learning, and leadership, I’m not yet familiar with the big names at this convention. So, I’m doing my own little investigation here to get a feel for the conversations that happen via AECT events.
So I’m listing here the names for the Champions Breakfast, and then linking to info about them, and what their main field/area of research seems to be at a quick glance. I welcome comments and corrections!
A video game is just a set of problems – you have to solve them in order to win. Connect that to problem based learning; problem posing learning – students learn to pose problems or forecast them.
The theory of learning behind games is quite different than regular learning. It’s much more complex than in school. If games couldn’t teach you, they would go broke. We teach the way we do because of the tests. We have to change the assessment, because it drives the teaching system. You wouldn’t be tempted to give a gamer a Halo test; if he finished the game, he already knows it. The learning system should be so immersive that the assessment is built in. Situated and embodied learning – can you DO stuff with your learning?
Learning – you need to be able to USE and ARTICULATE your knowledge.
Adaptive learning – you can’t move on until you are expert at that level. That’s a gaming concept also.
Games are one-on-one – the gamer is learning at their own level. It’s individualized instruction.
The differences of a game where the concepts are all connected in the game vs. where you answer a math problem and then get to move a car forward – but those two are connected.
One thing to watch out for with using off the shelf games is that students can be frustrated that the fun is taken out of the game because it’s been “school-ified”.
Game mechanics for gamification – feedback loops, iterative sequences for learning, levelling up with a reward system, may have real-life ramifications. Immediate feedback and self-reflection.
Issue of extrinsic motivation vs. intrinsic motivation. There aren’t enough studies to really say that extrinsic motivation are a detriment to intrinsic motivation.
The trick is really designing the curriculum around the game – and the creativity of the teacher.
Affinity space is the location, metagaming is the activity there, and paratext is the product of the collaboration/community.
There are communities around this – virtual communities, or playing with family, brothers, parents, uncles, in a real human interaction around the game. Well, of course! We have human interactions around Scrabble too!
Types of writing around gaming: fan fiction, machinima, walkthrough, maker spaces.
How to gamify assessment:
health bar – to show how healthy your character is
a map to show where you are compared to everything else in the course
XP – experience points
Present more challenges and opportunities to earn points
Quests and missions – students can choose these different goals and customize based on their interest
The idea of in course workshops (in the form of writing workshops) to support learning needed to be successful in the course game
How to do modification / modding – students can recreate parts of the class based on their interest
Resources and Links
Twitch – the world’s leading video platform and community for gamers
One of the participants is from Elcelsior College. Their Center for Game and Simulation-Based Learning. They have worked out several levels of integrating gaming in learning; but it’s not online yet. They are building a formal structure to support faculty in integrating gaming in their teaching.
Resources for using Civilization III (we had to find resources that went with an article below)
Student reflection is designed to assist students in thinking about their learning processes, their learning experiences, and their metacognition. Reflection is a critical component for teaching students to be self-directed learners. Students should reflect on the course content and it’s application to their personal and professional lives.
Renate Hood (University of Mary Hardin-Baylor, USA)
Notes and Thoughts
How to help students form personal values and built affective competencies
Aims at affective maturity in terms of civic and social responsibilities
Types of courses: value exploration courses; cultural exploration courses; service oriented learning;
How important is the affective domain in online teaching? for instructors; for the job market? How important is emotional intelligence for employers?
How do you teach students empathy? how do you teach empathy online?
How do you include reflection components so that students learn to care about topics/issues like service learning, social justice, etc. without telling them to care – it’s a tendency of some institutions; how do you help them grow on their own; and then how do you do that online?
“All reciprocal social interactions take place in “an ecological system” within which formation must be facilitated – Lowe & Lowe 2010
Socio-ecology is affected by transactional distance, social presence, existing personal values, and external interactions such as mentorships
How do we teach students to be more empathetic to those who learn something slower than they do? who can forgive themselves if they fail? who can work with diverse others? And then how do we do that online or in distance education
Mentorships in smaller measures incrementally in courses vs. waiting till the practicum
Make use of the community at large; designing offline experiences that include family and community interactions
In the course design – need higher social presence and lower transactional distance
Include more values formation elements: collaborative learning; learner centered assignments; include a degree of creative license; what is the role of the instructor in this situation?
How to allow for students to be honest on what they really care about or not; netiquette is important
Role play sites / cartoon sites / animation / avatars – to help students wrestle with affective content and act out situations
The big questions are around assessment of values – psychology could help design assessments and surveys
Several of the attendees in the room are also looking at the relationship between their student evaluations and components of their quality assurance process. This made for interesting discussions:
Ideas for refining process and research: Do an analysis to see if the questions on the course evaluation fit into the same concepts that we think we are measuring (for aligning our standards and the questions on the course evaluation).
Issues of measurement: What do student evaluations measure? What do the external reviewers measures? and the faculty member self-reviews? Issues with measurement of learning that happens outside the LMS – course activities in the publisher’s textbook site; live sessions; web 2.0 tools, etc.
I participated in the twitter stream this morning during the keynote, which was great! But I thought I’d just collect here some resources mentioned and shared in the twitter stream that I want to keep:
Quote: “Virtually every student expressed the belief that the opportunity to assume responsibility for shaping their contractual obligations helped maximize their commitment to the course and fostered ownership of their learning in ways that the conventional grading practices did not.” Brubaker, Nathan, D. 2010.
Lots of fodder to think about. Loved this keynote.
Common use of chunking content; breaking up videos; what prior knowledge would students need before they do this course? where is the instructor presence? how do you design a course so that it has instructor presence?
Online experiential learning – is it case studies? no, actually it really is real-life experiential learning; connections to employers; the reflection piece is really important too
Side note/thinking: instructional designers work from theory; instructional designers curate content. The more I realize what instructional designers do, and what really good instructional designers do, like Melanie, I wonder if we are going to get to to a place where some of the best courses really are online, not f2f? who is supporting this type of learning f2f? not enough in higher ed, I think
Let’s assume creativity and consistency are at opposite ends of the spectrum – are they?
Consistency – template standard production line model
Creativity – it’s different each time it’s taught because it changes based on the student
Extreme example – wholly standardized course – it starts with best practice; updates are difficult; faculty feels disengaged; can be restricted by the LMS; how do we have faculty bring their experience to the course; how do we not demotivate them;
Extreme example #2 – wholly creative; non-consistent; innovative techniques for design; build the course as it goes; design tailored to faculty, authentic experience based on the student needs; confusion on the part of the learner; longer development time; lack of continuity across the program (accreditation)
Consistency is used to create the order that enables creativity.
Consistency can enable creativity
Consistency: standard verbiage, course build, core principles (i.e. chunking, assessment of prior learning),
Creativity can come in how you deploy the content; navigation
Questions to consider further: What are additional ways to find the balance? What are some course design elements that should be standardized? What pressures have you encountered when trying to find the balance? Where can faculty add their own flair? What about assessment? can faculty adjust points and scores? but not outcomes.
Personal experiences – that’s where faculty can add their flair – sharing video/audio with their stories
4 ways to find the balance
Have a starting point. Design principles. Standard terminology, standard look and feel, blueprint, an umbrella theme and structure
Give ’em options. Give both instructional designers and faculty options. Options on lesson delivery, suite of tools, assessment strategies, different models. Let them choose. Give lots of choice. Let them add videos, redo videos as needed.
The 40/30/30 rule. 40% of the course is the core and designed with consistent rigor; publisher level quality, scalability, and revised for substantial changes in the core content. 30% of the course is flex. Tailored content, regionalism, personal tastes of the instructor, quickly changeable by faculty. 30% of the course is the teach part. Personality and context; constructive suggestions, timely feedback; instantly amenable by faculty. This part can change.
i.e. The core is the Lesson; the flex is readings and media; the teach: the announcements in the course.
We don’t want the core to get to the point where it inhibits creativity.
Be flexible. Let’s train on critical thinking, attention to detail, problem solving, learning principles and NOT on just the tools and the blueprint and the exact way to do it. Instead, teach the instructional designers relationship building – to work with the faculty from what they want to do. Then learn what the faculty needs instead of just saying we do it this way.
Things I want to work on more
Articulated core learning principles (i.e. feedback to students) that guide the course design
Things to think about with revision process; how does it come? do you need a form? do you need a ticketing system?
How to allow more flexibility in some of our high enrollment classes with multiple sections
Note: This presentation was fast paced and packed with ideas!
Why do we need more engagement?
Photo by CutePictureSite.com
How can we create more of a classroom atmosphere with different types of engagement than just the discussion boards.
Starting with the federal regulations and definitions:
definition that requires “regular and substantive interaction” with the teacher
credit hour: one hour direct faculty instruction; two hours of out of class work each week for 15 weeks
accreditors are reviewing the reliability and accuracy of the credit hour policy
students need to be engaged in your course shell in a way that accreditors can review it
syllabi are reviewed to check if the interactive features are required; interaction has to be required for your course not to be categorized as a correspondence course
in an audit, they are looking to see student logins to the classroom space; don’t just send it out on the email; get students to login to read the announcements and “show up” in class
So, how can you actually have online interaction and engagement?
Move beyond: read/watch, post, reply to a classmate. Let’s get rid of that box and think about something else. Both on campus and online courses should have
On-Campus Interaction: Class Discussion and Activities
Online Interaction: Class Discussion and Activities
Voice comments, voice discussion (use that term instead of audio because it sounds more personal)
Rename discussions to “Discussion and activities”
Activities: You can give a percentage or complete or grade. You don’t have to grade everything. In an f2f class you have in class activities that aren’t graded. They just need to complete.
Everything has to be linked to your course objectives and learning outcomes.
Look for application and mastery. Align the content with career placement – what do they need to do? What are the skills that employers are looking for? Build that into your online course and face to face too!
Scaffold in learning the new technologies for things that they need to use the tool later – like tools they have to use for student presentations.
Don’t scare online students with a voice, video, padlet; do that text based. But then have another assignment 5-10 question assignment; make sure they know the syllabus.
Idea: have students watch a 29 minute video on APA; and then have a quiz on it. We need this idea in our Masters programs.
Use an adaptive release on the syllabus quiz – picky stuff that they keep emailing about – 10 questions along – get the students to do it – they can’t see the rest of the course until they do that
Have one on one meetings with the student – scheduled with the teacher between weeks 2 & 5; it’s a requirement in the course; it changes everything when they experience this
Require the students to record two of their four required group sessions to ensure that they are showing up to their group work.
Reflection & Journal activiites; – mid & final course reflections – on the objectives; how have they applied or how do they see they will apply their learning?
Student generated content – have them present, do role plays, do a group project, record their presentation (could be recorded); their presentations are in the discussion board, which do you believe are the top two and why? – play the role of the evaluator
Virtual field trips – meet the author, virtual tours of organizations such as national institutes of health, ustream onsite visits locally
Technology Tools Besides the Discussion Board
Padlet: You can put MP4s, PDFs, a collection of comments; gives feedback to everyone in the class; one use is to put all the resources to have students access – like video tutorials on APA etc; another use is keeping ideas and resources for the next time the course is taught; padlet for peer review – each student makes their padlet and then the other students comment on it.
ePoster – have students make their poster presentation on padlet, including a voice recording
Tellagami: to give a really quick audio/video feedback to the student
Vocaroo: for students or teachers to present / give feedback
Tip: When you use tools outside of the LMS, make sure you include it in the syllabus, announcements, etc – and that allows whoever reviews your course to know about the engagement and faculty presence included in your course.
Apps and activities: 3D Brain App – for teaching neurocognition for nursing
Online flashcards i.e. studyblue.com – have the students create flashcards and post them in the discussion board – and then pick the best sets of flashcards and why they are the best; groups collaboratively develop flashcards
ustream – bring in guest speakers to your online students; stream to the campus & online students; campus/course speakers; stream it! watch the required event; then have 5-10 questions; you can’t require them to show up to a live event; but require them to watch; they have to get 100% mastery; ask 2 questions from the content; one that the speaker said, and one at the end; you have to pay attention to be able to do it – you have to get 100% to get the credit for it