Aah the Choices! Selecting the Right Web 2.0 Apps for your Class

In contrast to the absence of personal involvement in the selection of course management systems that are deployed campus-wide on many institutions of higher education, the decision to adopt some Web 2.0 technologies may largely rest on the initiative of individual instructors. No doubt, there is a lot more flexibility in the selection and integration of these technologies in the classroom. For those who are just getting started, the first hurdle is how to select (among the myriads of available choices), sound technologies that seamlessly fit the intended purpose. As with any new venture, there may be challenges along the way. One must therefore assume a high level of self reliance, motivation, and also be sufficiently committed to the process in order to assure a desirable outcome.

Consider these fundamental questions as you commit time and effort to learn and incorporate a new technology in the classroom; the selection process might just become a little easier:

1. What do I wish to accomplish?
2. How will the technology further my course objectives?
3. How is the technology currently being used in my discipline?
4. Are other instructors in my department using the technology?
5. How will the technology enhance a currently time-consuming task?
6. What is the learning curve for me and for my students?
7. What is the reliability and scalability of the technology?
8. What challenges/problems do I anticipate?
9. What level of support can I expect online, internally, or from the vendor on this technology?

What's in a Label? Distance Education vs. Distance Learning

It is generally acceptable to use terms "distance learning" and "distance education" interchangeably as they are deemed to mean the same thing. According to Webopedia, the online encyclopedia for computer technology, distance learning is defined as:

"A type of education, typically college-level, where students work on their own at home or at the office and communicate with faculty and other students via e-mail, electronic forums, videoconferencing, chat rooms, bulletin boards, instant messaging and other forms of computer-based communication".
Here's another definition from a business source:
"Distance education, also called distance learning, has existed for centuries. It involves obtaining knowledge outside of the traditional avenues of attendance at learned institutions. Some recent definitions have focused on it as a new development, involving advanced technology. A few have even sought to define it in terms of a single technology ¯ usually the one they are reviewing or marketing. (North 1993)
Other sources basically offer similar definitions.

It may be accurate to state that a majority of individuals involved in distance learning (or distance education) do not pause to consider which of these terms is the more fitting description of what they do as administrators, instructional designers, program coordinators, or students. I fall in that category. Until quite recently, I never thought much about the validity of the use of one term over the other. My awakening occurred at the beginning of my first fully online educational pursuit in, of all areas, a distance education administration program at a major public university. In the first few days, my colleagues and the instructors engaged in an interesting debate on this issue. In the end, the term "distance education" won over "distance learning". The rationale for this conclusion was that, since learning occurs within the individual, essentially, "there is no such thing as distance learning". Learning is an internal phenomenon not a process that is removed or separate (distant) from the learner. Sounds logical? You decide.
Apparently, I might not have learned the lesson well, or the awakening I mentioned earlier was only provisional, at best. I catch myself still using the terms distance education and distance learning liberally and interchangeably to this day. In the grand scheme of things, maybe it does not matter.

Revisiting Web 2.0: Narrowing the Technology Adoption Gap

In my previous post, I addressed the potential of Web 2.0 technologies to become the "great equalizers" when comparing technology adoption among early adopters and laggards in higher education. A number of issues have been documented on why technology is not adopted in the classroom. Among laggards, navigating through the myriads of Web 2.0 technologies might be a forboding task. A meaningful approach to help them along would be to select classroom activities and recommend technologies that would enhance their delivery or comprehension, for example. The idea is to bridge the disconnect between technology adoption and potential benefits and at the same time, frame the rationale for making the transition to teaching with technology. The pros and cons of selecting any technology should be discussed, such as the time required to update information. In the mind of the instructor, the relationship between effort and rewards is significant in determining the extent of personal commitment to changing existing teaching practices. Another option would be to form small cohorts of like (or unlike) minds to provide peer support, and a platform for exchanging ideas on concrete practices. Instructors appreciate the opportunity to share their expertise and to learn from each other; this strategy provides such an outlet. As part of this effort, Web 2.0 technologies should be employed to communicate, collaborate and interact with the technologies directly in order to further demonstrate their potential. Modeling technology use increases the possibility of its adoption in the classroom.

Web 2.0 Apps: Equalizers or Alienators in Higher Education?

Web 2.0 refers to Web technologies that aim to enhance creativity, collaboration and information sharing. When used appropriately, these technologies such as wikis, blogs, podcasts, social bookmarking services, and media depositories can readily promote closer web-based communities and social interaction without much of a learning curve, or increased investment in resources. Studies on technology adoption have classified technology users at different levels; on one extreme are the early adopters, and on the other, the laggards. While the characteristics of Web 2.0 applications can be formidable assets to anytime, anywhere learning, one wonders if their availability and ease of use has had a significant reduction in the number of those who would normally be considered technology laggards in higher education. In other words, has the rate of technology adoption changed among laggards as a result of the onslaught of Web 2.0?

Are some instructors missing the opportunity to move online learning (or learning in general) forward by failing to adopt Web 2.0 technologies? Naturally, instructors who have been generally less likely to adopt technology in their classes may still need a little nudging regardless of the ease in use of a technology. A proactive role of faculty development would be to demonstrate, with concrete examples, how Web 2.0 technologies can enhance teaching and learning. Furthermore, an emphasis on the capacity of such technologies to improve human contact and interaction might just earn them the role of the "great equalizers" when it comes to technology adoption in higher education.

Creative Commons

Creative Commons provides a space for educators, artists, researchers, authors and others to share their works with designated tiers of usage rights. Works such as videos, documents, images can be used or remixed with full owner's permission. The idea is to build collaboration and share knowledge more freely than is possible under the current copyright laws. The world of knowledge can only be enhanced by the collective effort of all who contribute and enhance it. A journal article about Creative Commons can be found here.

Looking into the Future...

... highlight of graduation, courtesy of Paul K. ~~~July 27, 2007~~~

Facebook and Distance Education

In my previous posts, I did not address the issue of Facebook use in distance education directly. It has become evident in my review of the limited literature currently available, that Facebook is not yet the technology of choice in (higher) education.

In considering the place of Facebook in distance education, a few questions come to mind:

1. Does Facebook fill a gap in terms of new features currently lacking in the delivery of content and communication with learners in distance education?

2. As a social playground for college students, would the use of Facebook enhance or diminish the image of a distance education program?

3. What would Facebook offer over and above the current technologies already in place for distance education?

4. Would the 'language of Facebook' naturally spill over into academic rhetoric?

When institutions of higher education are promoting "one-stop services" for their distance education programs, they do not appear (at the moment) overly eager to bring a tool like Facebook in the neatly bundled services currently available through their course management systems (CMSs) such as Angel or Blackboard. Higher education is not yet ready to surrender the shackles of CMSs where students' minds are (theoretically) more attuned and receptive to learning. However, other social networking tools (e.g. blogs, wikis, and podcasts) appear to be more readily adopted in distance education than Facebook. Note that integration rather than replacement of CMSs is the only role that these tools are currently suited for.

Facebook clearly provides a social outlet for college students, a fact backed by the large membership among this peer group. Socializing, however its unintended outcomes, is part and parcel of education of the whole person. Facebook has its place in that sense, but there seems to be a lack of any compelling reason to significantly integrate it into distance education. Students could use it as a secondary information exchange outlet in a cooperative learning mode with classmates that they have invited in their space, to complete group projects, for example. The services offered through Facebook (e.g. chatting, meeting new classmates, arranging for social/academic meetings) can well be attained using the current technologies in CMSs without the risk of security breaches and other legal matters pervasive in social networking websites.

It is possible that current perceptions about Facebook use in distance education could change overnight based on new developments in Facebook, technology integration, and a shift in thinking among distance education administrators about the role of this technology in promoting learning (e.g. time on task) within the envronment that some students spend a significant amount of time.

Social Networking - Facebook PPT

A narrated PowerPoint presentation and brief overview of Facebook is posted here. To hear the audio only without the slide presentation, click on the image to the left. Please note that the commentary is made in the context of higher education.

Social Networking - Facebook Podcast

I interviewed a college student about her experiences with Facebook, a social networking tool that is widely used by her peers. This is a brief snapshot of a personal account from the trenches. As an outsider into the world of social networking, I have learned a bit more about this growing phenomenon among the young and old alike in my readings while completing this project. A culminating product of this effort is this podcast.

Social Networking Tools - Facebook

The term 'social software' is fairly new and is used to describe an emerging genre of tools in many different contexts. The concept embraces a substantial number of technologies which are often integrated. In the context of distance education, Anderson (2005), defined 'educational social software' as :

"... networked tools that support and encourage individuals to learn together while retaining individual control over their time, space, presence, activity, identity and relationship."

Dalsgaard (2006), described social networks as:

"...connections or relations between people engaged in different kinds of communication. Communication can be one-way as well as two-way and synchronous as well as asynchronous."

Social networking technologies were not designed specifically to support academic activities, but some, such as wikis, blogs, and social bookmarking services are easily adaptable for that purpose. Others however, require effort to repurpose their functions for formal learning environments.

Facebook was launched in 2004 as a Harvard University-only site, but slowly expanded its service to include college students with active .edu email accounts. In 2005, it opened its doors to high school students, but they had to be inivited to join. Today, Facebook is open to anyone and its membership is growing at the expense of its closest rival, MySpace.

In the beginning, Facebook members regarded it more like a country club where college students could privately socialize. Today, there is a lot of discussion about online safety, but at the time, some students largely ignored safety measures and freely shared very personal information on the Web. As we now know, such a laissez-faire attitude only escalates certain vulnerabilities including stalking, and facilitates unethical behavior from ill-intentioned users of social networking websites. Now that Facebook is open to everyone, and attention about security is widely covered on campus as well as in the media, perhaps students are more cautious about the type of content they share, and the caliber of individuals they invite to share that content. Unethical behavior in social networking websites does occur, and individuals should be aware of it. An informative report on this issue is "Cleaning Up Their Online Acts" reported in the magazine Inside HigherEd. The author cites a case in which a 'social networker' reported a problem, but nothing was done about it. The article further describes incidents involving students and Web use at various institutions and how they were handled.
This video by the Office of the Privacy Commission of Canada is a fitting illustration of the realities of sharing information on the Web. The sheer number of students who use Facebook regularly begs for a need to raise awareness of real and potential problems, at least for the benefit of the cautious and the novice. Facebook has a number of privacy features, and members should learn to use them.

Today, it is not unusual to see students walking into the campus library, for example, without the usual 'tools of the trade' - book bag, pen and paper. The same students spend alarmingly many hours logged into some social networking website, chatting and sharing information with a select group of friends or even strangers. The popularity of Facebook perhaps can be explained by its capacity to fulfill very basic human needs - to socialize and satisfy our curiosity about fellow human beings.

Although extensively used by college students, Facebook is perhaps regarded as a personal space owned and controlled by the members, who probably want it to remain that way. In spite of its potential to enhance learning, its adoption for educational purposes does not yet appear to be widely reported. This is not say that Facebook has not been considered for use in higher education; in fact it has, as reported in this higher education institution's news release. Furthermore, some in-depth studies on Facebook have been conducted such the one found on this link.

Even though some students already use Facebook for academic pursuits, perhaps the need to invade spaces created for socialization among mutually-constructed social groups may seem unpallatable to some instructors. The majority of students, however, probably use it to escape the rigors of academic work, and would like to see it remain purely as a social outlet, free of any academic activities. It may also be accurate to state that instructor awareness of social networking tools is minimal at best. Those who are aware of such tools, may feel that other less controversial alternatives already in use are more suited for enhancing learning. Facebook is, at the moment, not one of them. The future might hold a different tune for the 'Facebook generation'. In addition, a fresh assessment of current core beliefs about the place of emerging social networking tools in education is imminent.


Further Related Reading:

Heer, R. (2007). My Space in College: Students Use of Virtual Communities to Define their Fit in Higher Education. In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2007 (pp. 2357-2363). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Lorenzo, G. , Oblinger, D. , & Dziuban, C. (2006). How choice, co-creation, and culture are changing what it means to be Net savvy. Retrieved July 15 2007 from https://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/eqm0711.pdf

Rishi, R. (2007). Always connected but hard to reach. Retrieved July 15, 2007 from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/eqm0721.pdf

Author unknown. (May, 2006). MySpace, Facebook, and other social networking tools: Here today, gone tomorrow? Retrieved July 26, 2007 from http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=1463#

Raptivity Project - Time Management for Online Learners

I created a brief pre-class trivia that can be used as part of an orientation program for novice online learners. Your comments are appreciated.

On Using Raptivity

Raptivity is a tool for developing interactive learning objects quickly.

What I liked in general
-simplicity

-interaction options are numerous

-template layouts are not cluttered

What I did not like using pre-class trivia template

I could not:

-reorder questions if I changed my mind; it can be time intensive to retype new order of questions if items are many

-create a table of contents

-navigate; presentation is sequential

-set time for Answer display; I think the response flashed much too quickly, at times

-type all the information needed; had to abbreviate answers

Note: Using an evaluation version may limit one's appreciation of the robustness of a software package.

I think Raptivity is a worthwhile product, but the price tag would be prohibitive for a number of college campuses. For most, justifying investing in it or similar rapid e-learning tools could only be considered if high levels of usage are predetermined.

I will post the web link to my creative production on the next blog.

Rapid Interactivity, Rapid e-Learning

E-learning is moving into a new phase in its development, thanks to new technologies such as Raptivity.These tools facilitate the development of interactive learning objects quickly and conveniently. Traditionally, integrating interactivity in online classes has been labor intensive and mostly ignored for that reason. Now, instructors can choose from a library of interactions including templates for developing games, quizzes, simulations, puzzles, and brainteasers to create exciting and highly engaging learning activities. The shell for an interaction model is simply customized for the learning unit and is ready to use.

Rapid interactivity tools provide an alternative to the traditional lecture, PowerPoint presentation, or discussion threads, and present learners with enhanced options for knowledge acquisition. They are designed for simplicity and integration with familiar desktop applications, thus adding to their appeal. They fill time-sensitive training solutions and can be readily updated. They empower subject matter experts (e.g. instructors) and make them more effective in the design outcomes of their courses.

A major criticism of these new technologies is that they are more suited for facilitating basic knowledge acquisition, not the higher-level thinking skills in Bloom's Taxonomy (e.g. synthesis and evaluation). As the tools become more feature-intensive, the question of balancing simplicity and sophistication must be considered if they are to retain their current appeal while also providing solutions for a diverse range of learning needs.

Read a white paper on rapid e-learning.

Polling

PollDaddy is a free tool for creating polls suitable for distribution in blogs, websites and social networking environments such as Facebook and MySpace. It is fairly easy to use and does not require any installation or much information to sign up. I have not explored this tool at length, but at first glance, the possibilities for its use may be limited in academia because of existing competing capabilities in course management systems. However, those who readily embrace techonology in academia will find this tool to be a convenient asset, and will use it to administer quick polls in websites, for example, to do pre/post test assessments of information presented. This could be followed by "just-in-time" teaching interventions.

Merits of Group Assignments in Online Education

In spite of the challenges of collaborating online in group activities, learning is a social event and should, as far as possible, be attained in conjunction with others. With new technologies being ubiquitously used in distance education, learners no longer have to bear the isolation that their peers experienced in the past.

When carefully managed, both academic and social needs of the learners can be met in virtual environments. Group activities increase time on task, opportunities for expression, and provide learners with a broader perspective on their learning.

For academic activities, learners probably benefit more when such activities are monitored by the instructor, and the expectations for performance are well defined. The instructor’s role is to be a "guide on the side" and steer learners in the right direction. As Vigotsky put it, a "More Knowledgeable Other" (MKO) may help a learner achieve tasks that may be in one's Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD).

Informal collaboration should be largely voluntary but encouraged for both academic and social exchanges. However, instructors should set the tone and protocols for communication because learners benefit most when the learning environment is cordial and respect for different voices/opinions is expected.

Synchronous Communication in Online Education: The Case of Group Projects

Does synchronous communication further the efforts of online collaboration? At a glance, the answer is definitely "yes" until one looks at the logistics of getting online learners together at the same time. A good number of people choose online education because of the flexibility it affords them, and the ability to continue pursuing their multi-layered daily responsibilities. If we consider Vigotsky's Social Development Theory, much can be gained from collaborative work. Assigning group projects is one way to achieve this. The question is, what are the ideal conditions for promoting active involvement in group projects among online learners? Here, I propose a few strategies:

1. Whenever possible, let the learners select from a group of topics, the project to pursue. When learners are interested in a project, they are more likely to participate with vigor

2. Provide clear guidelines of expectations for each group

3. Have incentives for completing the project

4. Identify a group coordinator

5. Within groups, determine milestones and contributions of each member or sub-group

6. Select the best methods of communicating and brainstorming; determine tools for synchronous communication or whether they should be used at all

7. Set deadlines for reporting to the group coordinator at each stage of the project.

While synchronous communication sounds like a great idea in online education, in reality, it is not particularly convenient or easy for learners to collaborate on projects in this manner. Our own class project (with relatively few team members) has undoubtedly proven this to be so. It is likely that one is able to reach more people who are not in their group than are; these are pehaps people who are ernest about their projects or whose schedules are more aligned, and therefore, should probably have been team members. The temptation to break away and form "side groups" is high but would defeat the premise of the exercise, whose unintended lesson might be to remind us that in real life, the ideal is usually out of reach, but that should not deter action.

Certainly, synchronous communication has its place and should be encouraged in online collaborative activities, but it not the only means through which Vigotsky's merits of social interaction for cognitive development can be attained. As for me, I have learned from others through synchronous communication during these last few days.

Reflections on Google Talk and other Web-based Communication

In looking at technology tools for learning environments, ease of use usually dominates the selection of a particular tool over all others. This past week, it has been interesting using Google Talk, an impressive, easy-to-use tool, to communicate with classmates around the world. One can say that synchronous communication is not revolutionary in education circles, but is in fact the traditional way of exchanging information. Not to diminish the positive impact of modern Web-based technology tools, but they merely make it possible for learners who are geographically dispersed to communicate in real time through chats, voice mail, video conferencing, or file exchange.

It is can be said that distance learners prefer using asynchronous to synchronous communication tools. The flexibility afforded by the former complements their choice to learn online and for some, perhaps, serious dialogue takes place here; they have time to reflect, gather their thoughts, and share ideas in the more self-paced environment. Perhaps, even the quality of the discussions is higher in the 'slower-paced' asynchronous communication.

Aside from the cost factor, Google Talk (although currently limited to two participants at a time) and course management system chat features are fairly similar. Google Talk might be a little easier to configure than some course management chat tools. Both can be used to hold office hours, brainstorm, or even facilitate the completion of entire projects. The popularity of Google and its continuing integration of multiple applications might add to its appeal. It is therefore a positive alternative to accomplishing a desirable aspect of online communication.

Whether synchronous or asynchronous, Web-based communication is an asset in education. It allows those who would otherwise shy away from participation in class to find their voice in the virtual world. For most, however online education is more aligned with the flexibility of using asynchronous rather than synchronous communication tools. Instructors should provide the necessary communication protocols and create a 'safe' environment where learners can openly express opposing views.

Survey Results

My survey Innovative Service in Higher Education: Blending High Tech with High Touch was sent to a couple of faculty and staff. This unscientific survey was really meant to test an online survey application and its capabilities. I found the survey service moderately easy to use with convenient features for disseminating surveys in different ways. However, important features such as the Change Collector Settings and Change Collector Restrictions should have been more prominently emphasized as they determine the look and feel of the survey. I found out that certain options cannot readily be changed once the survey is actively in progress.

The survey (for viewing only; please do not take it) was administered to explore (albeit narrowly), the "high tech/high touch" dimensions of the respondents' daily interactions with those they serve in higher education. Here are a few interesting results:

-To interact with primary clientele, most respondents said that they used face-to-face communication, although their clientele preferred to communicate with them using high tech (e.g. emails, instant messaging and other online communication tools).

-Most of the respondents stated that they were not restricted in how they chose to deliver service.

-The effectiveness of service provided was hindered by technology disparity, with the clientele perceived as having the more inferior technology. Another factor equally as important was the clientele's shortcomings in stating its needs precisely.

-The respondents indicated that they could provide better service if they had more time or different technologies to facilitate the process.

-Surprisingly, only 22.2% of the respondents stated that they always solicited feedback from their clientele after they rendered service.

The online survey service used was not available for stretches of time, which was a grave reminder that, using any technology requires planning ahead in order to minimize stress, accommodate glitches, AND meet deadlines.

Online Survey

I created a survey and distributed it via email, but then decided to give respondents extra time over the weekend and today to complete it. Unfortunately, it seems that SurveyMonkey service is currently inaccessible. Last time I checked, I had six out of ten responses. I will post an update with the details of the survey as soon as possible.

Camtasia Screen Capture

My project is titled, How to Add a Gradebook Item and Student Grades to the online Gradebook in Blackboard Learning Management System. It is a step-by-step demonstration of accomplishing these two tasks. I intend to improve on the product as I learn more about the capabilities of Camtasia and audio/mouse synchronization, among other things. "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing."