OMDE 603: Technology and Distance Education & E-Learning
Assignments and Course Work
OMDE 603 Learning Journal
September
18, 2013: Module 1 (Terminology and
History)
This is the first journal entry for OMDE 603, and I am eager to get as much out of this course as I can. We began with understanding that a variety of terms used within the realm of distance education can mean different things. For example, the term “distance education” is often replaced by terms like “correspondence study”, “independent study”, “online education”, and many others. Unfortunately, only the term “distance education” is able to fully encompass what it means to learn via online material. Interestingly, the instructor points out that studying by audio cassette or by CD-ROM is equally independent as other forms of “independent study”, yet they are not usually presented as methods of “independent study”. Ultimately, they are defined by the technology and not by the actual method of learning. I didn’t realize the depth and unique analysis that was used for educators to develop the term of “distance education” to describe this growing style of learning.
In this module we also covered the historical context of distance education, which includes the very first technologies that were used for learning at a distance. Learning at a distance can be dated as far back as the 19th century, where papers, texts, and still graphics containing black and white print were utilized in distance education. Materials at this time were distributed between students and teachers by way of the public postal system whose central point was a central sorting office. As the postal system became more and more reliable, this form of distance education became more and more popular. Around the 1930’s broadcast radio helped to expand distance education, but it wasn’t until the late 60’s and early 70’s that synchronous technologies like audio conferencing by phone and interactive television resulted in an explosion of interest for distance education. Currently, the Internet has resulted in the biggest boom in distance education interest. Unfortunately, the Internet has drummed up debates about the de-humanization of education that results from learning online. Many wonder if the Internet is doing more harm in the world of education, and argue that students are robbed of the experiences they would learn within a brick and mortar institution. In addition, many debate what has been coined as the “digital divide”, which describes the gaps that result between the developed countries that have access to this technology and the developing countries where this technology is more sparse.
Overall, I found this module to be extremely enlightening. When I first decided on this discipline as a major, I didn’t realize the depth of distance education and was unaware that it was supported by theory, debate, and decades of technologies. Regarding the “digital divide”, I wanted to add that a digital divide can be seen within our own country, as the United States have areas where the underprivileged do not have reliable access to computers or Internet services. I was ignorantly unaware of this aspect of education, an aspect that is rarely brought to the public’s attention. As far as increasing the education levels throughout the nation, I feel that there is an easy solution to this problem. There must be some sort of state funding that could enrich these areas of cities nationwide. Perhaps I’m blissfully unaware of the logistical difficulties, but feel it should be attempted nonetheless.
For future reference, I found the following link to be extremely helpful in learning about the different waves of distance education: Anderson, T. & Dron, J. (2011). Three generations of distance education pedagogy, IRRODL 12 (3) Retrieved September 18, 2013, from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/890/1663
September 27, 2013: Module 2 (Asynchronous & Synchronous Technologies)
Asynchronous distance education is education in which interaction by instructor and students occurs intermittently with a time delay and does not take place simultaneously. In this form, technology can be delivered using text, audio or video. One of the most important aspects of this type of education is that students and teachers are separated by both place and time. On the other hand, synchronous distance education occurs as a real-time, learning event in which all participants communicate directly with each other at the same time. In this form, content can also be delivered by text, audio and/or video. Students and teachers are separated geographically, but are learning together at the same time. From what I’ve read it appears that the most effective forms of learning occur when faculty and programs combine both synchronous and asynchronous technologies.
Having had so much experience as a student in an online environment, it is my opinions that in most situations the advantages far outweigh the drawbacks of asynchronous distance education. For the person that has the financial capacity and desire to pursue higher education, but no time or access to an institution, this is the perfect scenario for them. With that said, one of the greatest advantages to asynchronous distance education is flexibility. Having the ability to “go to class” whenever, wherever is usually what draws students to this form of education. Within an asynchronous learning environment, communication is vital to creating a setting that is as close to the traditional classroom as possible. For this reason, the resources available to each classroom are essential for a successful learning atmosphere. Utilizing tools like Wiki, streaming media, email, blogs, and discussion boards are just a few of the technologies that allow communication between students and students, and students with faculty. While these tools aren’t able to provide live communication, there are benefits to communicating in this manner. I feel that the asynchronous course offers students the ability to think about responses before posting. As a result, the postings and responses are completed with a great deal of attention, reflection, and oftentimes sensitivity. Personally, I am able to organize my thoughts and convey information better in writing. When actively speaking, it is difficult to develop ideas into logical and comprehensive expressions on the spot.
Synchronous learning involves technologies like instant messaging, web conferencing, white boards, and application sharing. The obvious advantages to synchronous learning is that individuals within a course are able to actively participate in a live setting. However, these tools are not without their own complications. According to Moore & Kearsley, “chat systems are not a particularly powerful tool for online classes, the do allow question-and-answer sessions and a chance for participants to complement the more useful asynchronous communications on forums and bulletin boards with the experience of exchanging ideas spontaneously” (2012, p. 80). It provides the closest environment to the traditional classroom setting, and is able to create more of a community-feel when compared to asynchronous learning. However, I think the matter of time could cause issues when scheduling “chat” sessions. The future of distance education is a combination of both synchronous and asynchronous learning in an online classroom. By utilizing both styles, instructors are able to provide students with a well-rounded learning environment that takes advantage of all tools available to students.
Reference
Moore, M. G. & Kearsley, G. (2012). Distance Education: A systems view of online learning. USA: Wadsworth-Cengage Learning.
September 30, 2013: Module 3 (Designing and Delivering DE Using Technology)
It’s obvious that there are multiple ways to design and deliver distance education. When it comes to a class within a distance education program, there are teams of specialists that are responsible for the design and delivery. However, there are often times where the instructor is responsible for creating the course students will utilize for learning. The following is a list of questions that must be answered when designing a course:
1.) Is the student required to just read and be tested on that material?
2.) Does the student get the chance to discuss what they are learning?
3.) What avenues for interaction are available?
4.) Is the learning self-paced or regimented?
5.) What are the roles of technology in the overall course design?
In this module I had the opportunity to examine the use of social media in the classroom. However, I had some concerns with younger students and the use of this form of technology. Most children spend the majority of their free time on electronics, and even as adults we tend to rely on our electronics more than we should. I feel that some technologies can definitely be worthwhile in a classroom setting, but feel social media sites like Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter should not be allowed in grades K-12. When I was in elementary school the computer was just being introduced. Looking back, I remember playing “Oregon Trail” and learning how to use a keyboard, but that was the extent of my exposure. Even into high school the only computer access was available in the library, and it was only used in place of the card catalog system.
I feel that learning can be accomplished without high-tech gadgetry, and in regards to some suggestions, totally disagree with the use of them in the classroom. For example, I would be against allowing students to use things like Twitter and Facebook. Some parents do not allow their children to use these sites for obvious reasons, and that could cause problems for those kids that do not have permission to participate. In addition, I think that because teachers have such little oversight regarding these social media platforms, in most cases they are probably inappropriate, especially in grades K-8. My daughter is in sixth grade and my son is in third, and their school has very strict guidelines regarding Internet access in the classroom. With that said, their school offers parents access to a website where they can view absences and grades, and this is an excellent tool. More specifically, it is a site that is linked to my children’s school records, allowing direct access to everything stored in the school’s office. I can set up alerts when my children’s grades fall below a certain limit or when their lunch accounts get low, I can check attendance and discipline reports, and it has a messaging system with a direct line to their teachers. This tool is a great way to ensure that I am doing everything I can to help my children succeed.
When it comes to the use of social media in college level courses, I think it is definitely more appropriate at this level. While I would still rather steer clear of sites like Facebook and Twitter, there are similar other options that are that can be just as effective. Creating apps, helping in developing countries, following mentors, and researching social media are all great ideas to further learning in a college classroom. Personally, the capstone project we are all working on is a great example of how social media can help in the classroom. I’m using weebly.com as my e-portfolio platform, and I feel this project is great for learning and will continue to serve as a great professional tool long after I’ve graduated.
While I believe we can all benefit from utilizing social media and other technological advances in the classroom, I believe younger learners should have their access limited. I agree with the majority of the suggestions presented in the blog, and have used them both in the past and currently. Of all the suggestions, I believe social media is most beneficial when it comes to communication. From group work to posting homework, social media allows college students to connected in a way that was once only available to those who attended class in a traditional setting. Technology has come such a long way since I was in grade school!
In this module we also covered open education, and were provided with valuable insight from noted distance education professional Tony Bates. I read and reviewed his article titled OERs: The Good the Bad and the Ugly, and the following is my analysis. Having had some exposure to Tony Bates in the little time I’ve spent studying distance education, I find his views to be both intriguing and relevant. In regards to his current blog, OERs: the good, the bad, and the ugly, I personally think he is on to something. The views Bates presents on the open educational resource movement are convincing, and I found myself agreeing with his presentation of the material. Bates begins his blog with emotionally driven statements. For example, he claims that “components of OERs also smack of hypocrisy, elitism and cultural imperialism, as well as failure to apply best practices in teaching and learning” (2013). He explains his title in the following way: the good = sharing of education, the bad = the elitist and cultural imperialistic views, and the ugly = failure to apply adequate educational practices (2013).
Like Bates, I agree that education should be open and is best applied through the sharing of information between people. While money seems to be a factor that awards people special benefits, all people should have access to education regardless of their financial situation. The idea of making quality educational resources available to the masses at no cost is an impressive and noble initiative. However, there is too much money to be gained by putting a price tag all forms of education, and politicians and big-wigs in the education industry aren’t willing to just give that money away. I might be way of by saying this, but perhaps the lack of quality OERs is the result of rich people protecting the large sums of money they bring in each year. Consequently, the OERs available are inferior and the reputation of distance education takes a huge hit.
I thought Bates’ use of the coal metaphor was perfect for explaining this current educational dilemma. You can give someone all of the coal you want, but if you do not provide them with the tools to correctly utilize the coal, they are left with a big mess they can’t decipher. If we are going to provide the public with access to educational resources, it is essential that those resources are both up to date and practical. This is especially key when providing OERs to developing countries that really need access to these resources. Very interesting blog!
Reference
Bates, T. (2011, February 6). OERs: the good, the bad and the ugly [Web blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.tonybates.ca/2011/02/06/oers-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/
October 14, 2013: Module 4 (DE vs. F2F and Instructor Roles)
While there are certainly similarities when it comes to designing and delivering a course for distance education compared to that of face-to-face environments. Perhaps an instructor might design a course in a similar fashion in both distance and face-to-face learning environments, but more care must be taken for distance education as it is more difficult to achieve the same amount of empathy and the same kinds of relationships that are more easily established in face-to-face environments. Two distance education theorists acknowledge the importance of a student/teacher connection in an online learning environment: Otto Peters and Börje Holmberg. Otto Peters, in response to transactional distance, explains that this is a descriptive feature of distance education and is necessary to understanding what is missing from communication between instructor and student. Bridging this gap, Peters places great importance on empathy, especially regarding the delivery of a course. He explains that the “empathy-creating conversation style leads to increased motivation to learn and better results than conventional presentation of learning matter” (Bernath, & Vidal, 2007, p. 430).
An especially important theory was developed by Börje Holmberg that covers the importance of a guided didactic conversation. According to Moore & Kearsley (2012), this states that “distance education implies that the character of good distance education resembles that of a guided conversation aimed at learning and that the presence of the typical traits of a conversation facilitates learning” (p. 210). When it comes to course design and development, the study guide of distance education courses is different from what you’d expect from a syllabus or textbook for face-to-face learning. It is more like a “map of the course and the framework for the other materials to rest on” and generally includes an introduction to the course with goals, defined structure of the course, suggestions for being successful in the course and much more (2012, pp. 104-105). In addition to what is available in face-to-face courses, distance education must pay especially close attention to course design. This is the majority of what the student will interact with, so it must have accessibility that makes the most of the technologies available. In my opinion, it is a combination of accessibility and empathy that keeps a student both motivated and interested.
Instructors play a vital role in Distance Education compared to face-to-face courses. The majority of the courses I’ve taken over the last five years have been online, but this last spring I had the opportunity to take a couple courses on the University of Oklahoma campus. Compared to on campus courses, it appears that online instructors commit more time and energy to a course than on campus instructors. In a sense, online instructors must work 24 hours a day to meet the needs of students that are logging into the classroom at all times of the day. One important aspect to keep in mind is that the majority of what is seen in the online classroom has been created by a team of professionals instead of a single instructor. Together, they keep in mind a variety of variables to ensure the “classroom” is engaging for a variety of students. The deeper I get into my coursework for distance education, the more I realize online instructors are responsible for. It’s not as simple as showing up for a 9-5 workday and going home.
The article by G. Kurtz (2011) titled “Using web 2.0 for fostering students’ creativity and supporting diversity in online courses: Strategies and practices”, shows some of the work an online instructor puts into the course they are teaching. Essentially, the article states that web 2.0 technologies can assist instructors in “fostering creativity and support diversity in different educational contexts allowing for innovative teaching practices to promotes students’ critical thinking, individual creativity, personal expression and dynamic group knowledge sharing and collaboration” (p. 2). Because the students in any given course are spread out around the world, it makes it more difficult for an instructor to cater a course such a dynamic and differing audience. Because each person has a different learning style, instructors must also keep this in mind in order to ensure they are engaging all students. Kurtz (2011) states that there are actually four learning styles, including visual/verbal, sensing/intuitive, sequential/global, and active/reflective (p. 3). Moore and Kearsley, in chapter 5 of “Distance education: A systems view of online learning”, also go into great detail regarding the responsibilities of an online instructor and the team that creates an online course. According to Moore and Kearsley (2012), there are several key factors that make teaching at a distance different from in an actual classroom. Among these factors, teachers must be cognizant of how students will react to the online classroom, the technological aspects of teaching, being empathetic to online students, engaging students and encouraging active participation. Some of the more specific functions include course management, student progress, learner support, and evaluating course effectiveness (Moore & Kearsley, 2012, p.129). In my opinion, some of the best instructors have been those who actively participate with students in discussion postings, provide excellent feedback on assignments, and are quick to answer questions submitted by students.
References
Bernath, O. & Vidal, M. (2007). The Theories and the Theorists: Why Theory is Important for Research. Entretiens et Conférences. Retrieved from http://ds.revuesonline.com/gratuit/DS5_3_08_entretien-conference.pdf
Kurtz, G. (2011). Using web 2.0 for fostering students’ creativity and supporting diversity in online courses: Strategies and practices. Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzA_NTEhbdH8RTQyc0wtNDE2S1k/edit?usp=drive_web&urp=https://learn.umuc.edu/content/enforced/8494-00636&pli=1
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2012). Distance education: A systems view of online learning. USA: Wadsworth-Cengage Learning.
October 20, 2013: Module 5 (Technologies, Learners, and Institutions)
So far this semester, technology has been addressed from the perspective of the teaching/learning function. Ultimately, distance education has been seen as a means for institutions to improve access to educational opportunity, to increase revenues, to reduce or displace costs, and/or to develop partnerships that increase the range of courses offered and to participate internationally as a global institution. Selecting technology may involve the challenge of balancing both institutional and learner goals in an appropriate mix. It also involves the application of technology to the classroom and to the distance educational program. As a consequence, there is much debate about the vision of future education and training organizations, the role that digital technology will play and what strategies and funding are needed to achieve the vision. While stakeholders may feel that digital technology is central to any vision of the future, they may not agree on the practical steps needed to achieve the vision.
In this module I was required to find an organization that identifies distance education technology in its mission/business plan/operational plan as a factor in facilitating institutional goals and mandates. The institution I chose is the University of Phoenix. Its mission is to “help pioneer conveniences that many students enjoy- evening classes, flexible scheduling, continuous enrollment, a university-wide academic social network, online classes, a digital library and computer simulations”. The way this institution uses distance education technology as a way to further its goals is with its creation of PhoenixConnect, which connects over 800,000 students, alumni, faculty members and staff. Students can achieve a sense of community, while connecting with others for support, to study, and to pursue personal interests or career goals. I think the reason the University of Phoenix chose to design a technological tool like this is because one of the main drawbacks to distance education is a lack of a community-like feel among students and faculty. By creating their academic social network, they are able to lessen the distance between students-students and students-faculty. Personally, I think it’s a great idea for institutions to create their own “university-wide, Facebook-like” social network to link those in the university together, especially universities that are exclusively online. Technologies like this help to make the online learning experience more like what a student might experience in traditional face-to-face settings.
Reference
University of Phoenix (2013). About University of Phoenix. Retrieved from http://www.phoenix.edu/about_us/about_university_of_phoenix.html
November 20, 2013: Module 6 (Emerging Technologies and the Future of DE)
The final module consists of new developments in online educational technologies, future issues relating to the technologies, and speculating on trends in DE technology. I would first, in a conference designed to showcase the technologies used in the DE of the future, design the conference around the “flipped classroom” detailed on the NMC Horizon Project Short List (2013). They describe it as a model of learning that rearranges how time is spent in and out of class, shifting the ownership of learning from educators to students (p. 1). The technology I would showcase for distance education is the mobile app. The NMC Horizon Project Short List (2013) states that Google and Apple, by September 2012, had more than 55 billion apps that were either sold or downloaded (p. 1). I believe the smartphone is an underappreciated tool that has yet to be fully utilized in the distance education environment. When I attended the University of Oklahoma (OU), they provided students with an app to access their student account, students could also enroll, check their classes and grades, and access all kinds of student support services. According to the NMC Horizon Project List (2013), mobile apps can be used to explore subjects on a deep level, facilitate content creation with cameras and microphones, allow universities to share grade information, and to connect learners to their campus. Personally, I believe apps that are specific to a university can add another dimension to meaningful inquiry and deep learning.
Of course, if this conference were held in a third world city, this technology would not be recommended to promote at a conference. Unlike the United States, the majority of people in third world regions do not have smart phones. According to mobiThinking (2013), 96 percent of the world population has a mobile subscription, but only 63 percent of people in Africa, for example, have mobile subscriptions (para. 2). This type of technology would not be accessible to all students in this area, especially since there is a lack of service in some of the more remote areas in Africa.
In this module we were asked what we would do if we were president of UMUC for a day, and the following is the response I provided. I hope to look back on this in my last semester to see if my views have changed in any way. If I were UMUC President for a Day I would take a second look at how group projects are developed and graded for course activities. I think group projects are a great way to shorten the distance between students in an online environment. Through collaborative work online students get more of a sense of community, much like they would in a face-to-face setting. However, when you have group members that have withdrawn the course or refuse to participate, I don't think the activity serves the purpose it was meant to. At the moment I'm having difficulty with a group project in another course. Our project was originally designed for five students, of which two have dropped the course. Of the three of us left, only two of us have done any work on the assignment. It is due on the 27th and the two of us will get it done, but we are having to do more work than the activity probably meant for us to do. I think, in order to ensure group projects represent collaborative work, a great deal of the grade should be determined by the contributions of the student, instead of the final project alone. In OMDE 601, you are required to submit a paragraph with your assignment that states exactly what you provided to the group throughout the course of the project. This way the instructor can compare the contributions of all members of the group to see if there are any discrepancies. As a matter of fact, when I was at the University of Oklahoma, we also had to provide a few sentences summarizing what we thought each of our fellow group members had provided to the project. That way someone who hadn't participated wouldn't be awarded the same grade as those who had.
Of course, I chose this as the one thing I would change because I am frustrated at the moment, but I've seen situations like this occur in the majority of group projects I've been a part of. I think it counteracts the whole point of collaborative work. I still think it is a worthwhile change, since this is one of the most effective ways to create a community-like feel in distance education courses. Abridging this distance is one of the main issues that theorists and practitioners strive to understand, build upon, and develop further.
In this module we were asked to view a video of a speech given by Sherry Turkle. I thought it was interesting and wanted to include it in my journal. The link is <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtLVCpZIiNs.>. Sherry Turkle's speech on relationships and connectivity was interesting, but was not accurate regarding my relationship with my own smartphone. Do I have one, yes; do I use it that often, no. My husband often asks why we pay each month for me to have a phone, because I very seldom have it on me. Anyone who knows me knows that I don't check email, texts, or my voicemail very often. The best way to get in touch with me is by phone. At 33 years old, I grew up on the cusp of the Internet boom, so I know what life was like both before and after it emerged into our lives. I think Sherry touched on a lot of interesting points. We see the videos of people walking into fountains because they are so focused on their phones, and I think that is representative of a great deal of people worldwide.
I try to keep from technology totally taking over in my house, call me traditional. There is no TV or phones at the dinner table, and the same goes for when we have dinner at a restaurant. I also make my kids put down their electronics for one hour each night, allowing them to choose an activity like reading, board games, puzzles, or a time to talk. I think it is an effective way to ensure they understand the importance of conversation and relationships.
I don't, however, agree with everything Sherry stated. I think her remarks on this topic were a bit "doomsday" in nature, as I don't believe things are as bad as she made them out to be. I go to parks all the time and I've never seen mothers pushing their kids with one hand while their playing on their phone with the other. I have friends on Facebook that aren't trying to portray their "perfect" selves. Having been in the military, without social media there's no way I ever would have stayed in contact with the people I've met over the years. I think because I've been able to stay in contact with the friends I've made moving from base to base, my life is better for it, not worse. While Sherry's speech was certainly thought provoking, but might be more applicable to those who have grown up knowing nothing other than this type of technology.
References mobiThinking (2013). Global mobile statistics 2013 part A: Mobile subscribers; handset market share; mobile operators. Retrieved from http://mobithinking.com/mobile-marketing-tools/latest-mobile-stats/a
NMC Horizon Project Short List (2013). Retrieved from http://horizon.wiki.nmc.org/file/view/2013-Horizon.HE-Shortlist.pdf/3924-8448/2013-Horizon.HE-Shortlist.pdf
November 27, 2013:
This will be the final journal entry I will write for this course. Throughout this semester I was able to obtain a better understanding of the technological aspect of distance education. It helped that I took this course in conjunction with OMDE 601, as a lot of the same material was presented in both courses, especially regarding the historical and theoretical aspects of distance education.
I noticed that the difference between my last semester of online courses at the University of Oklahoma (OU) and my first semester at UMUC have been night and day. I didn't notice the differences at first, but it quickly became apparent that UMUC understands the importance of dialogue and collaboration among students. It truly made my online experience feel like I was part of a face-to-face class. My last spring semester at OU was blended, meaning I was taking online courses while attending courses on campus. Those online courses had discussion boards that we were required to post on and required to respond to others, but there were only a few for the entire semester and absolutely no collaborative assignments at all. I really felt isolated from the rest of the class; I did my work and turned it in. I think I only corresponded with the instructors once or twice, and oftentimes I didn't even receive decent feedback for assignments. There were no suggestions to improve, descriptions of what I did well; they simply pointed out what was wrong and stuck a grade on it. I was shocked when I received feedback on my first assignment for this course. It was a couple paragraphs of information that helped improve later assignments. During this semester I've learned about the importance of empathy, deep and thoughtful dialogue, a sense of community, and effective and encouraging course design. This semester at UMUC has felt more like a face-to-face course at OU, and nothing like the sub-standard online courses I've taken. I've really enjoyed my first semester at UMUC, albeit there was a ton of work to accomplish.
This is the first journal entry for OMDE 603, and I am eager to get as much out of this course as I can. We began with understanding that a variety of terms used within the realm of distance education can mean different things. For example, the term “distance education” is often replaced by terms like “correspondence study”, “independent study”, “online education”, and many others. Unfortunately, only the term “distance education” is able to fully encompass what it means to learn via online material. Interestingly, the instructor points out that studying by audio cassette or by CD-ROM is equally independent as other forms of “independent study”, yet they are not usually presented as methods of “independent study”. Ultimately, they are defined by the technology and not by the actual method of learning. I didn’t realize the depth and unique analysis that was used for educators to develop the term of “distance education” to describe this growing style of learning.
In this module we also covered the historical context of distance education, which includes the very first technologies that were used for learning at a distance. Learning at a distance can be dated as far back as the 19th century, where papers, texts, and still graphics containing black and white print were utilized in distance education. Materials at this time were distributed between students and teachers by way of the public postal system whose central point was a central sorting office. As the postal system became more and more reliable, this form of distance education became more and more popular. Around the 1930’s broadcast radio helped to expand distance education, but it wasn’t until the late 60’s and early 70’s that synchronous technologies like audio conferencing by phone and interactive television resulted in an explosion of interest for distance education. Currently, the Internet has resulted in the biggest boom in distance education interest. Unfortunately, the Internet has drummed up debates about the de-humanization of education that results from learning online. Many wonder if the Internet is doing more harm in the world of education, and argue that students are robbed of the experiences they would learn within a brick and mortar institution. In addition, many debate what has been coined as the “digital divide”, which describes the gaps that result between the developed countries that have access to this technology and the developing countries where this technology is more sparse.
Overall, I found this module to be extremely enlightening. When I first decided on this discipline as a major, I didn’t realize the depth of distance education and was unaware that it was supported by theory, debate, and decades of technologies. Regarding the “digital divide”, I wanted to add that a digital divide can be seen within our own country, as the United States have areas where the underprivileged do not have reliable access to computers or Internet services. I was ignorantly unaware of this aspect of education, an aspect that is rarely brought to the public’s attention. As far as increasing the education levels throughout the nation, I feel that there is an easy solution to this problem. There must be some sort of state funding that could enrich these areas of cities nationwide. Perhaps I’m blissfully unaware of the logistical difficulties, but feel it should be attempted nonetheless.
For future reference, I found the following link to be extremely helpful in learning about the different waves of distance education: Anderson, T. & Dron, J. (2011). Three generations of distance education pedagogy, IRRODL 12 (3) Retrieved September 18, 2013, from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/890/1663
September 27, 2013: Module 2 (Asynchronous & Synchronous Technologies)
Asynchronous distance education is education in which interaction by instructor and students occurs intermittently with a time delay and does not take place simultaneously. In this form, technology can be delivered using text, audio or video. One of the most important aspects of this type of education is that students and teachers are separated by both place and time. On the other hand, synchronous distance education occurs as a real-time, learning event in which all participants communicate directly with each other at the same time. In this form, content can also be delivered by text, audio and/or video. Students and teachers are separated geographically, but are learning together at the same time. From what I’ve read it appears that the most effective forms of learning occur when faculty and programs combine both synchronous and asynchronous technologies.
Having had so much experience as a student in an online environment, it is my opinions that in most situations the advantages far outweigh the drawbacks of asynchronous distance education. For the person that has the financial capacity and desire to pursue higher education, but no time or access to an institution, this is the perfect scenario for them. With that said, one of the greatest advantages to asynchronous distance education is flexibility. Having the ability to “go to class” whenever, wherever is usually what draws students to this form of education. Within an asynchronous learning environment, communication is vital to creating a setting that is as close to the traditional classroom as possible. For this reason, the resources available to each classroom are essential for a successful learning atmosphere. Utilizing tools like Wiki, streaming media, email, blogs, and discussion boards are just a few of the technologies that allow communication between students and students, and students with faculty. While these tools aren’t able to provide live communication, there are benefits to communicating in this manner. I feel that the asynchronous course offers students the ability to think about responses before posting. As a result, the postings and responses are completed with a great deal of attention, reflection, and oftentimes sensitivity. Personally, I am able to organize my thoughts and convey information better in writing. When actively speaking, it is difficult to develop ideas into logical and comprehensive expressions on the spot.
Synchronous learning involves technologies like instant messaging, web conferencing, white boards, and application sharing. The obvious advantages to synchronous learning is that individuals within a course are able to actively participate in a live setting. However, these tools are not without their own complications. According to Moore & Kearsley, “chat systems are not a particularly powerful tool for online classes, the do allow question-and-answer sessions and a chance for participants to complement the more useful asynchronous communications on forums and bulletin boards with the experience of exchanging ideas spontaneously” (2012, p. 80). It provides the closest environment to the traditional classroom setting, and is able to create more of a community-feel when compared to asynchronous learning. However, I think the matter of time could cause issues when scheduling “chat” sessions. The future of distance education is a combination of both synchronous and asynchronous learning in an online classroom. By utilizing both styles, instructors are able to provide students with a well-rounded learning environment that takes advantage of all tools available to students.
Reference
Moore, M. G. & Kearsley, G. (2012). Distance Education: A systems view of online learning. USA: Wadsworth-Cengage Learning.
September 30, 2013: Module 3 (Designing and Delivering DE Using Technology)
It’s obvious that there are multiple ways to design and deliver distance education. When it comes to a class within a distance education program, there are teams of specialists that are responsible for the design and delivery. However, there are often times where the instructor is responsible for creating the course students will utilize for learning. The following is a list of questions that must be answered when designing a course:
1.) Is the student required to just read and be tested on that material?
2.) Does the student get the chance to discuss what they are learning?
3.) What avenues for interaction are available?
4.) Is the learning self-paced or regimented?
5.) What are the roles of technology in the overall course design?
In this module I had the opportunity to examine the use of social media in the classroom. However, I had some concerns with younger students and the use of this form of technology. Most children spend the majority of their free time on electronics, and even as adults we tend to rely on our electronics more than we should. I feel that some technologies can definitely be worthwhile in a classroom setting, but feel social media sites like Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter should not be allowed in grades K-12. When I was in elementary school the computer was just being introduced. Looking back, I remember playing “Oregon Trail” and learning how to use a keyboard, but that was the extent of my exposure. Even into high school the only computer access was available in the library, and it was only used in place of the card catalog system.
I feel that learning can be accomplished without high-tech gadgetry, and in regards to some suggestions, totally disagree with the use of them in the classroom. For example, I would be against allowing students to use things like Twitter and Facebook. Some parents do not allow their children to use these sites for obvious reasons, and that could cause problems for those kids that do not have permission to participate. In addition, I think that because teachers have such little oversight regarding these social media platforms, in most cases they are probably inappropriate, especially in grades K-8. My daughter is in sixth grade and my son is in third, and their school has very strict guidelines regarding Internet access in the classroom. With that said, their school offers parents access to a website where they can view absences and grades, and this is an excellent tool. More specifically, it is a site that is linked to my children’s school records, allowing direct access to everything stored in the school’s office. I can set up alerts when my children’s grades fall below a certain limit or when their lunch accounts get low, I can check attendance and discipline reports, and it has a messaging system with a direct line to their teachers. This tool is a great way to ensure that I am doing everything I can to help my children succeed.
When it comes to the use of social media in college level courses, I think it is definitely more appropriate at this level. While I would still rather steer clear of sites like Facebook and Twitter, there are similar other options that are that can be just as effective. Creating apps, helping in developing countries, following mentors, and researching social media are all great ideas to further learning in a college classroom. Personally, the capstone project we are all working on is a great example of how social media can help in the classroom. I’m using weebly.com as my e-portfolio platform, and I feel this project is great for learning and will continue to serve as a great professional tool long after I’ve graduated.
While I believe we can all benefit from utilizing social media and other technological advances in the classroom, I believe younger learners should have their access limited. I agree with the majority of the suggestions presented in the blog, and have used them both in the past and currently. Of all the suggestions, I believe social media is most beneficial when it comes to communication. From group work to posting homework, social media allows college students to connected in a way that was once only available to those who attended class in a traditional setting. Technology has come such a long way since I was in grade school!
In this module we also covered open education, and were provided with valuable insight from noted distance education professional Tony Bates. I read and reviewed his article titled OERs: The Good the Bad and the Ugly, and the following is my analysis. Having had some exposure to Tony Bates in the little time I’ve spent studying distance education, I find his views to be both intriguing and relevant. In regards to his current blog, OERs: the good, the bad, and the ugly, I personally think he is on to something. The views Bates presents on the open educational resource movement are convincing, and I found myself agreeing with his presentation of the material. Bates begins his blog with emotionally driven statements. For example, he claims that “components of OERs also smack of hypocrisy, elitism and cultural imperialism, as well as failure to apply best practices in teaching and learning” (2013). He explains his title in the following way: the good = sharing of education, the bad = the elitist and cultural imperialistic views, and the ugly = failure to apply adequate educational practices (2013).
Like Bates, I agree that education should be open and is best applied through the sharing of information between people. While money seems to be a factor that awards people special benefits, all people should have access to education regardless of their financial situation. The idea of making quality educational resources available to the masses at no cost is an impressive and noble initiative. However, there is too much money to be gained by putting a price tag all forms of education, and politicians and big-wigs in the education industry aren’t willing to just give that money away. I might be way of by saying this, but perhaps the lack of quality OERs is the result of rich people protecting the large sums of money they bring in each year. Consequently, the OERs available are inferior and the reputation of distance education takes a huge hit.
I thought Bates’ use of the coal metaphor was perfect for explaining this current educational dilemma. You can give someone all of the coal you want, but if you do not provide them with the tools to correctly utilize the coal, they are left with a big mess they can’t decipher. If we are going to provide the public with access to educational resources, it is essential that those resources are both up to date and practical. This is especially key when providing OERs to developing countries that really need access to these resources. Very interesting blog!
Reference
Bates, T. (2011, February 6). OERs: the good, the bad and the ugly [Web blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.tonybates.ca/2011/02/06/oers-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/
October 14, 2013: Module 4 (DE vs. F2F and Instructor Roles)
While there are certainly similarities when it comes to designing and delivering a course for distance education compared to that of face-to-face environments. Perhaps an instructor might design a course in a similar fashion in both distance and face-to-face learning environments, but more care must be taken for distance education as it is more difficult to achieve the same amount of empathy and the same kinds of relationships that are more easily established in face-to-face environments. Two distance education theorists acknowledge the importance of a student/teacher connection in an online learning environment: Otto Peters and Börje Holmberg. Otto Peters, in response to transactional distance, explains that this is a descriptive feature of distance education and is necessary to understanding what is missing from communication between instructor and student. Bridging this gap, Peters places great importance on empathy, especially regarding the delivery of a course. He explains that the “empathy-creating conversation style leads to increased motivation to learn and better results than conventional presentation of learning matter” (Bernath, & Vidal, 2007, p. 430).
An especially important theory was developed by Börje Holmberg that covers the importance of a guided didactic conversation. According to Moore & Kearsley (2012), this states that “distance education implies that the character of good distance education resembles that of a guided conversation aimed at learning and that the presence of the typical traits of a conversation facilitates learning” (p. 210). When it comes to course design and development, the study guide of distance education courses is different from what you’d expect from a syllabus or textbook for face-to-face learning. It is more like a “map of the course and the framework for the other materials to rest on” and generally includes an introduction to the course with goals, defined structure of the course, suggestions for being successful in the course and much more (2012, pp. 104-105). In addition to what is available in face-to-face courses, distance education must pay especially close attention to course design. This is the majority of what the student will interact with, so it must have accessibility that makes the most of the technologies available. In my opinion, it is a combination of accessibility and empathy that keeps a student both motivated and interested.
Instructors play a vital role in Distance Education compared to face-to-face courses. The majority of the courses I’ve taken over the last five years have been online, but this last spring I had the opportunity to take a couple courses on the University of Oklahoma campus. Compared to on campus courses, it appears that online instructors commit more time and energy to a course than on campus instructors. In a sense, online instructors must work 24 hours a day to meet the needs of students that are logging into the classroom at all times of the day. One important aspect to keep in mind is that the majority of what is seen in the online classroom has been created by a team of professionals instead of a single instructor. Together, they keep in mind a variety of variables to ensure the “classroom” is engaging for a variety of students. The deeper I get into my coursework for distance education, the more I realize online instructors are responsible for. It’s not as simple as showing up for a 9-5 workday and going home.
The article by G. Kurtz (2011) titled “Using web 2.0 for fostering students’ creativity and supporting diversity in online courses: Strategies and practices”, shows some of the work an online instructor puts into the course they are teaching. Essentially, the article states that web 2.0 technologies can assist instructors in “fostering creativity and support diversity in different educational contexts allowing for innovative teaching practices to promotes students’ critical thinking, individual creativity, personal expression and dynamic group knowledge sharing and collaboration” (p. 2). Because the students in any given course are spread out around the world, it makes it more difficult for an instructor to cater a course such a dynamic and differing audience. Because each person has a different learning style, instructors must also keep this in mind in order to ensure they are engaging all students. Kurtz (2011) states that there are actually four learning styles, including visual/verbal, sensing/intuitive, sequential/global, and active/reflective (p. 3). Moore and Kearsley, in chapter 5 of “Distance education: A systems view of online learning”, also go into great detail regarding the responsibilities of an online instructor and the team that creates an online course. According to Moore and Kearsley (2012), there are several key factors that make teaching at a distance different from in an actual classroom. Among these factors, teachers must be cognizant of how students will react to the online classroom, the technological aspects of teaching, being empathetic to online students, engaging students and encouraging active participation. Some of the more specific functions include course management, student progress, learner support, and evaluating course effectiveness (Moore & Kearsley, 2012, p.129). In my opinion, some of the best instructors have been those who actively participate with students in discussion postings, provide excellent feedback on assignments, and are quick to answer questions submitted by students.
References
Bernath, O. & Vidal, M. (2007). The Theories and the Theorists: Why Theory is Important for Research. Entretiens et Conférences. Retrieved from http://ds.revuesonline.com/gratuit/DS5_3_08_entretien-conference.pdf
Kurtz, G. (2011). Using web 2.0 for fostering students’ creativity and supporting diversity in online courses: Strategies and practices. Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzA_NTEhbdH8RTQyc0wtNDE2S1k/edit?usp=drive_web&urp=https://learn.umuc.edu/content/enforced/8494-00636&pli=1
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2012). Distance education: A systems view of online learning. USA: Wadsworth-Cengage Learning.
October 20, 2013: Module 5 (Technologies, Learners, and Institutions)
So far this semester, technology has been addressed from the perspective of the teaching/learning function. Ultimately, distance education has been seen as a means for institutions to improve access to educational opportunity, to increase revenues, to reduce or displace costs, and/or to develop partnerships that increase the range of courses offered and to participate internationally as a global institution. Selecting technology may involve the challenge of balancing both institutional and learner goals in an appropriate mix. It also involves the application of technology to the classroom and to the distance educational program. As a consequence, there is much debate about the vision of future education and training organizations, the role that digital technology will play and what strategies and funding are needed to achieve the vision. While stakeholders may feel that digital technology is central to any vision of the future, they may not agree on the practical steps needed to achieve the vision.
In this module I was required to find an organization that identifies distance education technology in its mission/business plan/operational plan as a factor in facilitating institutional goals and mandates. The institution I chose is the University of Phoenix. Its mission is to “help pioneer conveniences that many students enjoy- evening classes, flexible scheduling, continuous enrollment, a university-wide academic social network, online classes, a digital library and computer simulations”. The way this institution uses distance education technology as a way to further its goals is with its creation of PhoenixConnect, which connects over 800,000 students, alumni, faculty members and staff. Students can achieve a sense of community, while connecting with others for support, to study, and to pursue personal interests or career goals. I think the reason the University of Phoenix chose to design a technological tool like this is because one of the main drawbacks to distance education is a lack of a community-like feel among students and faculty. By creating their academic social network, they are able to lessen the distance between students-students and students-faculty. Personally, I think it’s a great idea for institutions to create their own “university-wide, Facebook-like” social network to link those in the university together, especially universities that are exclusively online. Technologies like this help to make the online learning experience more like what a student might experience in traditional face-to-face settings.
Reference
University of Phoenix (2013). About University of Phoenix. Retrieved from http://www.phoenix.edu/about_us/about_university_of_phoenix.html
November 20, 2013: Module 6 (Emerging Technologies and the Future of DE)
The final module consists of new developments in online educational technologies, future issues relating to the technologies, and speculating on trends in DE technology. I would first, in a conference designed to showcase the technologies used in the DE of the future, design the conference around the “flipped classroom” detailed on the NMC Horizon Project Short List (2013). They describe it as a model of learning that rearranges how time is spent in and out of class, shifting the ownership of learning from educators to students (p. 1). The technology I would showcase for distance education is the mobile app. The NMC Horizon Project Short List (2013) states that Google and Apple, by September 2012, had more than 55 billion apps that were either sold or downloaded (p. 1). I believe the smartphone is an underappreciated tool that has yet to be fully utilized in the distance education environment. When I attended the University of Oklahoma (OU), they provided students with an app to access their student account, students could also enroll, check their classes and grades, and access all kinds of student support services. According to the NMC Horizon Project List (2013), mobile apps can be used to explore subjects on a deep level, facilitate content creation with cameras and microphones, allow universities to share grade information, and to connect learners to their campus. Personally, I believe apps that are specific to a university can add another dimension to meaningful inquiry and deep learning.
Of course, if this conference were held in a third world city, this technology would not be recommended to promote at a conference. Unlike the United States, the majority of people in third world regions do not have smart phones. According to mobiThinking (2013), 96 percent of the world population has a mobile subscription, but only 63 percent of people in Africa, for example, have mobile subscriptions (para. 2). This type of technology would not be accessible to all students in this area, especially since there is a lack of service in some of the more remote areas in Africa.
In this module we were asked what we would do if we were president of UMUC for a day, and the following is the response I provided. I hope to look back on this in my last semester to see if my views have changed in any way. If I were UMUC President for a Day I would take a second look at how group projects are developed and graded for course activities. I think group projects are a great way to shorten the distance between students in an online environment. Through collaborative work online students get more of a sense of community, much like they would in a face-to-face setting. However, when you have group members that have withdrawn the course or refuse to participate, I don't think the activity serves the purpose it was meant to. At the moment I'm having difficulty with a group project in another course. Our project was originally designed for five students, of which two have dropped the course. Of the three of us left, only two of us have done any work on the assignment. It is due on the 27th and the two of us will get it done, but we are having to do more work than the activity probably meant for us to do. I think, in order to ensure group projects represent collaborative work, a great deal of the grade should be determined by the contributions of the student, instead of the final project alone. In OMDE 601, you are required to submit a paragraph with your assignment that states exactly what you provided to the group throughout the course of the project. This way the instructor can compare the contributions of all members of the group to see if there are any discrepancies. As a matter of fact, when I was at the University of Oklahoma, we also had to provide a few sentences summarizing what we thought each of our fellow group members had provided to the project. That way someone who hadn't participated wouldn't be awarded the same grade as those who had.
Of course, I chose this as the one thing I would change because I am frustrated at the moment, but I've seen situations like this occur in the majority of group projects I've been a part of. I think it counteracts the whole point of collaborative work. I still think it is a worthwhile change, since this is one of the most effective ways to create a community-like feel in distance education courses. Abridging this distance is one of the main issues that theorists and practitioners strive to understand, build upon, and develop further.
In this module we were asked to view a video of a speech given by Sherry Turkle. I thought it was interesting and wanted to include it in my journal. The link is <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtLVCpZIiNs.>. Sherry Turkle's speech on relationships and connectivity was interesting, but was not accurate regarding my relationship with my own smartphone. Do I have one, yes; do I use it that often, no. My husband often asks why we pay each month for me to have a phone, because I very seldom have it on me. Anyone who knows me knows that I don't check email, texts, or my voicemail very often. The best way to get in touch with me is by phone. At 33 years old, I grew up on the cusp of the Internet boom, so I know what life was like both before and after it emerged into our lives. I think Sherry touched on a lot of interesting points. We see the videos of people walking into fountains because they are so focused on their phones, and I think that is representative of a great deal of people worldwide.
I try to keep from technology totally taking over in my house, call me traditional. There is no TV or phones at the dinner table, and the same goes for when we have dinner at a restaurant. I also make my kids put down their electronics for one hour each night, allowing them to choose an activity like reading, board games, puzzles, or a time to talk. I think it is an effective way to ensure they understand the importance of conversation and relationships.
I don't, however, agree with everything Sherry stated. I think her remarks on this topic were a bit "doomsday" in nature, as I don't believe things are as bad as she made them out to be. I go to parks all the time and I've never seen mothers pushing their kids with one hand while their playing on their phone with the other. I have friends on Facebook that aren't trying to portray their "perfect" selves. Having been in the military, without social media there's no way I ever would have stayed in contact with the people I've met over the years. I think because I've been able to stay in contact with the friends I've made moving from base to base, my life is better for it, not worse. While Sherry's speech was certainly thought provoking, but might be more applicable to those who have grown up knowing nothing other than this type of technology.
References mobiThinking (2013). Global mobile statistics 2013 part A: Mobile subscribers; handset market share; mobile operators. Retrieved from http://mobithinking.com/mobile-marketing-tools/latest-mobile-stats/a
NMC Horizon Project Short List (2013). Retrieved from http://horizon.wiki.nmc.org/file/view/2013-Horizon.HE-Shortlist.pdf/3924-8448/2013-Horizon.HE-Shortlist.pdf
November 27, 2013:
This will be the final journal entry I will write for this course. Throughout this semester I was able to obtain a better understanding of the technological aspect of distance education. It helped that I took this course in conjunction with OMDE 601, as a lot of the same material was presented in both courses, especially regarding the historical and theoretical aspects of distance education.
I noticed that the difference between my last semester of online courses at the University of Oklahoma (OU) and my first semester at UMUC have been night and day. I didn't notice the differences at first, but it quickly became apparent that UMUC understands the importance of dialogue and collaboration among students. It truly made my online experience feel like I was part of a face-to-face class. My last spring semester at OU was blended, meaning I was taking online courses while attending courses on campus. Those online courses had discussion boards that we were required to post on and required to respond to others, but there were only a few for the entire semester and absolutely no collaborative assignments at all. I really felt isolated from the rest of the class; I did my work and turned it in. I think I only corresponded with the instructors once or twice, and oftentimes I didn't even receive decent feedback for assignments. There were no suggestions to improve, descriptions of what I did well; they simply pointed out what was wrong and stuck a grade on it. I was shocked when I received feedback on my first assignment for this course. It was a couple paragraphs of information that helped improve later assignments. During this semester I've learned about the importance of empathy, deep and thoughtful dialogue, a sense of community, and effective and encouraging course design. This semester at UMUC has felt more like a face-to-face course at OU, and nothing like the sub-standard online courses I've taken. I've really enjoyed my first semester at UMUC, albeit there was a ton of work to accomplish.