DETC 620: Training & Learning with Multimedia
Assignments and Course Work
DETC 620 Learning Journal
Module 1: June 22, 2014
Weeks 1-5 were spent on media and learning and our first assignment required us to prepare arguments in groups and participate in an online debate (media debate) that would take place during the fifth week of the course. This assignment was worth 15% of the overall course grade.
The first module was spent covering OERs and MOOCs, and we defined multimedia learning in the context of distance learning/e-learning/online learning. The latter was difficult because there is no one definition for “multimedia learning.” I believe that learning is best supported in the constructivist sense of active learning by collaborative activities that engage us in authentic tasks and real-life examples. Therefore, I feel providing hands-on experiences with multimedia applications are a great way to explore and evaluate everything about distance learning environments. The basic knowledge acquired in this module was OERs (open educational resources, which I had very little knowledge about coming into this course.
The best part of this unit was preparing for the debate. Broken into two groups, we were required to research a position relating to the impact of media on learning. We either had to take the side of Clark or that of Kozma. The following are the resources we had to get us started on our side of the debate:
(1.) Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459.
(2.) Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179-211.
(3.) Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 34-38.
(4.) Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development,42(2),7-19.
(5.) Carter, V. (1996). Do media influence learning? Revisiting the debate in the context of distance education.Open Learning (February), 31-40.
You might think that these readings are rather "out-dated"; however, the authors touch upon fundamental questions that are essential in understanding the relationship between media and learning. The Clark-Kozma debate is a classic in the field of media and learning, and it is essential for students to engage with both sides of the argument. The task is to participate in an online discussion, in which you will advocate for one of the two positions in the media debate. For preparing the discussion the class is divided into two groups (following the alphabet) and there are two study group areas for you to discuss your preparations and share notes and other documents. The CLARK-Group supports Clark's position and arguments, e.g.: "The best current evidence is that media are mere vehicles that deliver instruction but do not influence student achievement any more than the truck that delivers our groceries causes changes in our nutrition" (Clark, 1983, p. 445). The KOZMA-Group supports Kozma's position and arguments, e.g.: "Some students will learn a particular task regardless of the delivery device; others will be able to take advantage of a particular medium's characteristics to help construct knowledge" (Kozma, 1991, p. 205).
This module was spent preparing for the debate. Our group was able to meet via Skype to discuss team roles and responsibilities. While we never had all members of the group together during our meetings, we were able to come up with a fair outline to address the different components of the debate. It was interesting to see how well a group of people from different areas of the country were able to work so well together. I really think we have developed a comprehensive position to attack this debate, and the data we have backing out position is both all-encompassing and strategic. This was a very interesting way to address the content in this module.
Module 2: July 13, 2014
Weeks 6-8 covered the evaluation of multimedia applications. The second assignment we turned in required us to pretend we were members of a jury in a multimedia award. We selected multimedia examples and wrote an expert appraisal to evaluate the multimedia learning products. This assignment was worth 30% of the overall course grade.
This module described the development of educational media in the history of DE and explained the impact of media on access, interaction, and independence. This module forced me to critically analyze the impact of the use of media on learning in light of distance education and I was able to identify possible learning activities in multimedia environments through the incorporation of distance education learning theory. At the end of this week we actually completed the debate. I really enjoyed working together as a team to develop a strong position for our side of the debate. This was an excellent way to convey two very different positions and how they apply to multimedia tools in a learning environment.
While most students were able to state their positions in a responsible and mature manner, there were a couple of students that were perhaps a bit harsh in their claims. I think this made the debate environment a bit unstable, as I was afraid to post my response based on how a few students would respond to my posts. I think this instructor could have been a bit more present in the debate and could have helped students stay on task. This would have also helped with some of the immature responses posted by a few students. Additionally, students would go off on tangents and end up discussing content that had nothing to do with distance education or multimedia learning. Overall, I would say this assignment was helpful in learning the content of this module, I just thought it could have been managed better.
In addition to the debate, this module dealt with the theoretical considerations regarding media and learning. The assignment that was due during this module required us to start working on a review that compares two finalists for a multimedia award. We used the criteria presented during this module to determine an evaluative measure, and carried out the evaluation by considering the usability and the pedagogical design of the multimedia being considered for this award. I am a little nervous about this assignment, as I don’t feel I have a good handle on the requirements, but know of a good multimedia tool to use for this assignment. I plan on getting started early so I am able to manage my time appropriately and get this assignment turned into the writing coach prior to the due date.
I really enjoyed this module, and while the debate seemed to overtake the majority of the other content presented this module, I really feel like I have a good understanding of the content presented. The discussion involving the influence of media on the methods used in teaching and learning and the learning process itself was extremely helpful and beneficial to totally understanding the content. Next module we focus on the evaluation of multimedia applications. This module will be helpful as I complete assignment #2.
Module 3: August 3, 2014
Weeks 9-11 covered a proposal and audio presentation for a multimedia project. We were required to submit a written assignment (assignment #3) worth 30% of the overall course grade and a podcast (assignment #4) worth 15% of the overall course grade. The written assignment served as the proposal of the multimedia project and the podcast introduced and defended the proposal.
This module was spent identifying the characteristics of educational software, exploring examples of multimedia applications/OERs, learning about the methods of multimedia evaluation, compiling criteria to evaluate multimedia learning environments, applying evaluation rubrics, and preparing an evaluation review. I found this module to be one of my favorites thus far in my MDE journey. It’s definitely been the most helpful, and I can see how this content can be applied to a distance education environment. Evaluating courses before they are presented to students is a vital step in the course development process, and is the only way to ensure students are given the best opportunity to learn.
The following is an excerpt I found that establishes the true purpose of the evaluation of multimedia programs: There is a remarkable growth in the interest and use of multimedia programs besides the growth in skill in developing multimedia programs. There is an ocean of content on the Internet, developed without really worrying about the quality of it. To design and develop a quality program, we must spend some time to understand the qualities of a good multimedia program and website. The overall objective of evaluation and the process of evaluation of various multimedia programs vary substantially. It’s about testing whether a multimedia program fulfills the objectives set and suggests improvements to make the program useful for its target audience. Evaluation is not a uniform process and evaluation cannot be identical for all programs. It invariably will have to be made of the objectives that the software wishes to fulfill (Cemca, 2015).
Reference
Cemca (2015). Evaluation of multimedia. Retrieved from http://cemca.org.in/ckfinder/userfiles/files/Section9.pdf
Module 4: August 10, 2014
The final week focused on completing the development of our proposal for a multimedia project. This module’s objectives included the following: learning to select suitable types of media for different target groups, compiling a multimedia project proposal, identifying barriers to success in implementing multimedia learning, and planning measures of quality assurance and evaluation. We discussed project management, planning and implementing multimedia learning, education innovation and quality assurance in DE, and organizational structures of e-learning support/faculty support.
I really enjoyed investigating topics involving quality assurance and project management as applied to distance education and e-learning projects. I felt the goal of this unit was to use the proposal and podcast as a way to develop your own understanding of multimedia tools where distance education is concerned. Evaluating online courses and content is an ongoing process, I believe, and should not be a terminal or one-time activity. As we learn and develop more in regards to this type of learning tool, evaluative measures must be adjusted and altered to properly evaluate these fluid and ever-changing tools. I really thought about the link between instructional design and project management, and between project management and quality assurance. All three are definitely intertwined and closely related. Keeping on top of developments in technology like this is vital to ensuring the best product possible. I ended up doing very well on my final project, and while I wasn’t excited about the podcast (which I was anxious about doing in another course), I was able to create a project that I was definitely proud of. This course was excellent and provided me with a plethora of tools I know will be useful as I pursue a career in distance education. The assignments were an excellent way to ensure students retained and properly applied content learned throughout the semester. Great course; great instructor!
Weeks 1-5 were spent on media and learning and our first assignment required us to prepare arguments in groups and participate in an online debate (media debate) that would take place during the fifth week of the course. This assignment was worth 15% of the overall course grade.
The first module was spent covering OERs and MOOCs, and we defined multimedia learning in the context of distance learning/e-learning/online learning. The latter was difficult because there is no one definition for “multimedia learning.” I believe that learning is best supported in the constructivist sense of active learning by collaborative activities that engage us in authentic tasks and real-life examples. Therefore, I feel providing hands-on experiences with multimedia applications are a great way to explore and evaluate everything about distance learning environments. The basic knowledge acquired in this module was OERs (open educational resources, which I had very little knowledge about coming into this course.
The best part of this unit was preparing for the debate. Broken into two groups, we were required to research a position relating to the impact of media on learning. We either had to take the side of Clark or that of Kozma. The following are the resources we had to get us started on our side of the debate:
(1.) Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459.
(2.) Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179-211.
(3.) Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 34-38.
(4.) Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development,42(2),7-19.
(5.) Carter, V. (1996). Do media influence learning? Revisiting the debate in the context of distance education.Open Learning (February), 31-40.
You might think that these readings are rather "out-dated"; however, the authors touch upon fundamental questions that are essential in understanding the relationship between media and learning. The Clark-Kozma debate is a classic in the field of media and learning, and it is essential for students to engage with both sides of the argument. The task is to participate in an online discussion, in which you will advocate for one of the two positions in the media debate. For preparing the discussion the class is divided into two groups (following the alphabet) and there are two study group areas for you to discuss your preparations and share notes and other documents. The CLARK-Group supports Clark's position and arguments, e.g.: "The best current evidence is that media are mere vehicles that deliver instruction but do not influence student achievement any more than the truck that delivers our groceries causes changes in our nutrition" (Clark, 1983, p. 445). The KOZMA-Group supports Kozma's position and arguments, e.g.: "Some students will learn a particular task regardless of the delivery device; others will be able to take advantage of a particular medium's characteristics to help construct knowledge" (Kozma, 1991, p. 205).
This module was spent preparing for the debate. Our group was able to meet via Skype to discuss team roles and responsibilities. While we never had all members of the group together during our meetings, we were able to come up with a fair outline to address the different components of the debate. It was interesting to see how well a group of people from different areas of the country were able to work so well together. I really think we have developed a comprehensive position to attack this debate, and the data we have backing out position is both all-encompassing and strategic. This was a very interesting way to address the content in this module.
Module 2: July 13, 2014
Weeks 6-8 covered the evaluation of multimedia applications. The second assignment we turned in required us to pretend we were members of a jury in a multimedia award. We selected multimedia examples and wrote an expert appraisal to evaluate the multimedia learning products. This assignment was worth 30% of the overall course grade.
This module described the development of educational media in the history of DE and explained the impact of media on access, interaction, and independence. This module forced me to critically analyze the impact of the use of media on learning in light of distance education and I was able to identify possible learning activities in multimedia environments through the incorporation of distance education learning theory. At the end of this week we actually completed the debate. I really enjoyed working together as a team to develop a strong position for our side of the debate. This was an excellent way to convey two very different positions and how they apply to multimedia tools in a learning environment.
While most students were able to state their positions in a responsible and mature manner, there were a couple of students that were perhaps a bit harsh in their claims. I think this made the debate environment a bit unstable, as I was afraid to post my response based on how a few students would respond to my posts. I think this instructor could have been a bit more present in the debate and could have helped students stay on task. This would have also helped with some of the immature responses posted by a few students. Additionally, students would go off on tangents and end up discussing content that had nothing to do with distance education or multimedia learning. Overall, I would say this assignment was helpful in learning the content of this module, I just thought it could have been managed better.
In addition to the debate, this module dealt with the theoretical considerations regarding media and learning. The assignment that was due during this module required us to start working on a review that compares two finalists for a multimedia award. We used the criteria presented during this module to determine an evaluative measure, and carried out the evaluation by considering the usability and the pedagogical design of the multimedia being considered for this award. I am a little nervous about this assignment, as I don’t feel I have a good handle on the requirements, but know of a good multimedia tool to use for this assignment. I plan on getting started early so I am able to manage my time appropriately and get this assignment turned into the writing coach prior to the due date.
I really enjoyed this module, and while the debate seemed to overtake the majority of the other content presented this module, I really feel like I have a good understanding of the content presented. The discussion involving the influence of media on the methods used in teaching and learning and the learning process itself was extremely helpful and beneficial to totally understanding the content. Next module we focus on the evaluation of multimedia applications. This module will be helpful as I complete assignment #2.
Module 3: August 3, 2014
Weeks 9-11 covered a proposal and audio presentation for a multimedia project. We were required to submit a written assignment (assignment #3) worth 30% of the overall course grade and a podcast (assignment #4) worth 15% of the overall course grade. The written assignment served as the proposal of the multimedia project and the podcast introduced and defended the proposal.
This module was spent identifying the characteristics of educational software, exploring examples of multimedia applications/OERs, learning about the methods of multimedia evaluation, compiling criteria to evaluate multimedia learning environments, applying evaluation rubrics, and preparing an evaluation review. I found this module to be one of my favorites thus far in my MDE journey. It’s definitely been the most helpful, and I can see how this content can be applied to a distance education environment. Evaluating courses before they are presented to students is a vital step in the course development process, and is the only way to ensure students are given the best opportunity to learn.
The following is an excerpt I found that establishes the true purpose of the evaluation of multimedia programs: There is a remarkable growth in the interest and use of multimedia programs besides the growth in skill in developing multimedia programs. There is an ocean of content on the Internet, developed without really worrying about the quality of it. To design and develop a quality program, we must spend some time to understand the qualities of a good multimedia program and website. The overall objective of evaluation and the process of evaluation of various multimedia programs vary substantially. It’s about testing whether a multimedia program fulfills the objectives set and suggests improvements to make the program useful for its target audience. Evaluation is not a uniform process and evaluation cannot be identical for all programs. It invariably will have to be made of the objectives that the software wishes to fulfill (Cemca, 2015).
Reference
Cemca (2015). Evaluation of multimedia. Retrieved from http://cemca.org.in/ckfinder/userfiles/files/Section9.pdf
Module 4: August 10, 2014
The final week focused on completing the development of our proposal for a multimedia project. This module’s objectives included the following: learning to select suitable types of media for different target groups, compiling a multimedia project proposal, identifying barriers to success in implementing multimedia learning, and planning measures of quality assurance and evaluation. We discussed project management, planning and implementing multimedia learning, education innovation and quality assurance in DE, and organizational structures of e-learning support/faculty support.
I really enjoyed investigating topics involving quality assurance and project management as applied to distance education and e-learning projects. I felt the goal of this unit was to use the proposal and podcast as a way to develop your own understanding of multimedia tools where distance education is concerned. Evaluating online courses and content is an ongoing process, I believe, and should not be a terminal or one-time activity. As we learn and develop more in regards to this type of learning tool, evaluative measures must be adjusted and altered to properly evaluate these fluid and ever-changing tools. I really thought about the link between instructional design and project management, and between project management and quality assurance. All three are definitely intertwined and closely related. Keeping on top of developments in technology like this is vital to ensuring the best product possible. I ended up doing very well on my final project, and while I wasn’t excited about the podcast (which I was anxious about doing in another course), I was able to create a project that I was definitely proud of. This course was excellent and provided me with a plethora of tools I know will be useful as I pursue a career in distance education. The assignments were an excellent way to ensure students retained and properly applied content learned throughout the semester. Great course; great instructor!