Session Two Delivery and Assessment

1.  What are three key things associated with delivery of eLearning?

• Utilize Faculty Time Effectively- Designing (particularly for new courses and when not tech savvy) and Delivery consumes a lot of time (often seen 24/7).
• Quality control in the online environment- without the benefit of eye-contact, instructors have to take extra steps to ensure students are engaged an active not passive learning that appeals to all learning styles using the most up to date technology with strong student support.
• Building discussion into the course- teacher/student, student/student, content/student active participation ensures that students are critically thinking and digesting information in meaningful ways.

(Haugen, et. all, 2001, p. 128-129)

2. What is the difference between assessment and evaluation? Why is understanding the difference important in eLearning?

“Assessment is measurement of learning, usually associated with specific learning objectives or other established criteria. Evaluation can include assessment, but also includes a judgment of quality, establishment of value or worth along with communication about the significance of the student performance.” “Both assessment and evaluation are used to assign grades to students. “(Newberry, 2014).  Online students are more likely to only complete task that are graded. Faculty can use assessment for online test which provides immediate feedback. On the other hand, evaluation can refer to feedback on writing: stages of papers, posting on discussion boards, interaction/communication faculty/student and student/student; evaluation functions as a way of elevating critical thinking to produce deeper learning.

3. One of the readings this week suggests that a chat room should be set up to promote social interaction in online classes. Which reading is this and what are the pros and cons to this suggestion?

Haugen (2011) suggest creating a chat room “for student social interaction” in Quality Initiatives Figure 3. Student centered learning interaction is crucial to lowering affective filters that prevent learning. Also, exchanging of ideas promotes deeper thinking. Finally, online student face higher drop-out rates becomes they are not as likely to feel connected and part of a learning community; therefore, chat rooms can serve to promote social connections thus promoting student retention. There are two chief drawbacks to promoting chat rooms: lack of learning platform technology support on learning management systems like Blackboard, and liability issues if instructor uses social media and doesn’t closely monitor to ensure school policies are being followed. By definition, students are more informal (less academic) in chat mode which creates potential for inappropriate conduct and even liability for harassment, accidents related to drugs and alcohol for student events set-up via chat, etc.

4. What is “deep learning” as discussed in the readings? Is “deep learning” something we should promote in online learning? Why and how?

While it is entirely possible to have a cohesive class that socially interacts, higher education requires a deeper exchange of ideas for real learning to take place.  According to Garrison and Cleveland-Inns (2005) in “Facilitating Cognitive Presence in Online Learning:

 Interaction Is Not Enough”,

A community of inquiry must include various combinations of interaction among content, teachers, and students (Anderson and Garrison 1997; Moore 1989).

Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000) provided a model of a community of inquiry that maps and defines educational presence. A community of inquiry is more than a social community and more than the magnitude of interaction among participants. A community of inquiry is the integration of cognitive, social, and teaching presence. Considered together, the three presences address the qualitative nature of interactive inquiry consistent with the ideals of higher education.

If students are to reach a high level of critical thinking and knowledge construction, the interaction or discourse must be structured and cohesive (Aviv et al. 2003; Pawan et al. 2003; Thomas 2002; Wu and Hiltz 2004).

It is possible to shift shallow to deep thinking, but only when teachers structure classes to emphasize quality of interaction over quantity.  Critical discourse must be specifically designed into Higher Education, and it requires instructor feedback that mandates deeper teacher/student and student/student interaction through the exchange of questions and research to support ideas.  The more hand-on role of instructors in online discussion is a shift in teaching methodology.   In one of the earliest journals studying online education, Educators Solloway and Harris (1999) describe the challenges of student interaction in Creating Community Online.    Solloway and Harris describe intentionally not participating in discussions as a way to force students to reach their own conclusions; although, initially students struggled with this, eventually they had success (1999, 3-4).  I would reason that this hands-off approach might work with some graduate level students who are already comfortable in college academia, but my own first year basic skills students need more guidance.  I understand that Solloway and Harris were trying to make their students think for themselves and come up with original ideas rather than simply memorizing the their professors; however, I would suggest that with more emphasis placed on designing an online class with critical thinking at the core of every assignment (from topic, to learning process, to exchange of information and interaction), one has the best chance of producing deep thinkers.

5. Identify and explain each of Kolb’s four-stage learning cycle.

Kolb’s learning theory combines experience, perspective, cognition, behavior (The Kolb Model).  http://www.leopard-learning.com/kolb.html

6. Explain how the readings this week (and your own research) connects with the Blackboard discussion.

Your own lecture on Blackboard was what best tied the readings with our Discussion Board Topic and these Blog questions. Basically because student interaction isn’t happening in a more natural face-to-face manner, the instructor must design the class around creating social interaction. The interaction isn’t really so much a matter of creating a learning community and promoting retention, as much as, using the interactions between students as a means for deepening thinking and producing ‘transformation” of understanding. Through moderating these discussions, the professor can evaluate depth of student understanding.

7. Quote your best entry from this week’s Blackboard discussion. Explain why you chose it and what it demonstrates about your understanding, learning process etc.

I’ve selected my favorite portion of the Session 2 Discussion. I think I have been guilty of presuming that highly interactive classes were always my most successful one. I believed that as long as students were talking and sharing ideas, we were accomplishing student success. The quote below made me realize that the measure of success must be on quality of discussion and not quantity.

While it is entirely possible to have a cohesive class that socially interacts, higher education requires a deeper exchange of ideas for real learning to take place.  According to Garrison and Cleveland-Inns (2005) in “Facilitating Cognitive Presence in Online Learning: Interaction Is Not Enough”,

A community of inquiry must include various combinations of interaction among content, teachers, and students (Anderson and Garrison 1997; Moore 1989).

 Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000) provided a model of a community of inquiry that maps and defines educational presence. A community of inquiry is more than a social community and more than the magnitude of interaction among participants. A community of inquiry is the integration of cognitive, social, and teaching presence. Considered together, the three presences address the qualitative nature of interactive inquiry consistent with the ideals of higher education.

If students are to reach a high level of critical thinking and knowledge construction, the interaction or discourse must be structured and cohesive (Aviv et al. 2003; Pawan et al. 2003; Thomas 2002; Wu and Hiltz 2004).

8. Identify the student you think was the most important participant in the Blackboard discussion. Explain why and provide at least one quote from that student’s contributions to the Blackboard discussion.

Carol wins hands-down. I actually think her clear, timely, collaborative post in response to my post for help epitomizes the purpose of student interaction leading from shallow to deep understanding. Without giving it much thought, I accepted what I assumed was a limitation of using BB as a student rather than faculty. Carole helped me think more deeply about the issue and realize that my assumption was incorrect and it was really a simple technology issue. Thanks Carole!

• Thank you Christen for taking time to read my posting.
• Actually I was very new when it came to dealing with some tech. stuffs. I had to seek for more help and the above video 
• was developed for me. So what you need to do is to select some words you’d like to embed the link (see image).
• For my post I have “this video”
• Then on your tool bar you will see a tool “Insert/Edit link” just below the font size (see attachment), which you have to click on it. 
• A new window will open for you to copy your URL on it (you need to have it ready), input the URL then click insert as shown on the attached image. 
• You will be given an option to open it on new window, select yes. Then it is done.

9. Reflect on what you have learned this week. What have you learned that has the potential to inform or influence you or your practice of online learning going forward? Explain why.

I touched on this in Daniel’s Blog, but let me elaborate. Prior to starting the E-Learning Technology Certificate two weeks ago, I had believed that all I needed to learn were all the cool Learning Platforms, Educational and Social Apps, and any other learning software related to my field. I simply thought that if I had the right “tools” I could create fabulously impressive online classes to share with my colleagues. Just weeks into classes, my eyes have been opened! Yes I still need to learn all the tools of the trade, but equally important is mastering the process of designing online classes. The methodology and cognitive skills evaluated and assessed will dictate how I set-up the course, what aspects of BB I’ll utilize, the type of assignments I will require- the list goes on and on. It’s a much bigger project than I initially expected and I’m excited.

References

Fostering Deep Learning Online. (n.d.) Retrieved from:

http://www.bestteachersinstitute.org/id118.html

Garrison, R. (2005) Facilitating Cognitive Presence in Online

Learning: Interaction is not Enough. The American Journal of Distance Education, Volume19.   http://anitacrawley.net/Articles/GarrisonClevelandInnes2005.pdf

Haugen, S., LaBarre, J., and Melrose, J. Online Course Delivery:

Issues and Challenges. (2001). Retrieved from International Association for Computer Information Systems: http://iacis.org/iis/2001/Haugen127.PDF

Newberry, B. Delivery. (2014, October). Evaluation and

Assessment in eLearning. Session 2 ETEC 648 Blackboard CSUSB.

Solloway, S., & Harris, E. (1999). Creating Community Online

[Introduction to Online Learning course document]. Educom Review, 34, n.p. Retrieved from

http://www.educause.edu/library/resources/creating-         community-online

Stansfield, M., McLellan, E. and Connolly, T. (2004). Enhancing

Student Performance in Online Learning and Traditional Face-to-Face Class Delivery. Journal of Information Technology Education, Volume 3. http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol3/v3p173-188-037.pdf

The Kolb Model. Retrieved from Regis University:

http://academic.regis.edu/ed202/subsequent/kolb2.htm