The Blog has been an exceptional experience that has detailed one of the many tools that distance education instructors can use as asynchronous communication for participants. This experience has forced me (in a positive manner) to open up to methods of communication that allow me to compose experiences in the course, as well as thoughts, about those experiences. Through this media I have been able to set up an account and create a well choreographed virtual log of my thoughts in the course. This tool has many uses for participants in a distance education course, and should be probed more, to find its exact use as a communication tool.
I would highly recommend this tool for future courses and would use this tool myself as a future distance education instructor. One of the downfalls of the blog is its originality. The blog is a great tool; however, technology is advancing into social network sites that allow for blogs within the site, which takes away from the novelty of the composition web log. Over all the experience was of quality nature and I look forward to my future endeavors with similar projects.
Friday, July 17, 2009
Differentiation between DE and F-T-F
In the Module 3 conference we discussed the role of the instructor and the aspects of distance education (de) and face-to-face (f-t-f) learning; which, really made me think about many aspects of both educational methods. Eventually, it is inevitable that traditional courses will start to bend and add new methods to make the f-t-f courses more convenient and accessible to the students taking the courses (this can already be seen in the transitioning to hybrid courses and the use of de as an outside tool for f-t-f courses).
The roles of course instructors are continuously changing and adapting to new methods in both systems. In previous post, I had stated that the traditional instructor's role stay's primarily the same, as the head of the class, with pre-planned (scripted) material that is being read to students. However, this is untrue, as the f-t-f instructors are continuously changing methods of teaching by teaching online courses or adding online materials to the f-t-f course. One of the interesting aspects that differ between the modes of teaching is the design. One of the design differences mentioned by Bates & Poole (2003) is the use of one instructor to create a course (more beneficial when using other outside sources) for f-t-f, however, the DE course needs many different faculty members to create the course (p. 158). With many different faculty members being utilized to create a de course, how much more money does it cost to run the de course over a f-t-f course?
This concept is interesting as it shows the amount of work that is put into creating ease of education. It will be interesting in time to see how much of the f-t-f classroom is transitioned into the web. The explosion of de institutions and online programs has already occurred, and now it is almost a waiting game to see how much is left of the traditional classroom in a couple of years.
Reference
Bates & Poole, Chapter 7, "Approaches to the Design of Technology-Based Learning," pp. 153-179
The roles of course instructors are continuously changing and adapting to new methods in both systems. In previous post, I had stated that the traditional instructor's role stay's primarily the same, as the head of the class, with pre-planned (scripted) material that is being read to students. However, this is untrue, as the f-t-f instructors are continuously changing methods of teaching by teaching online courses or adding online materials to the f-t-f course. One of the interesting aspects that differ between the modes of teaching is the design. One of the design differences mentioned by Bates & Poole (2003) is the use of one instructor to create a course (more beneficial when using other outside sources) for f-t-f, however, the DE course needs many different faculty members to create the course (p. 158). With many different faculty members being utilized to create a de course, how much more money does it cost to run the de course over a f-t-f course?
This concept is interesting as it shows the amount of work that is put into creating ease of education. It will be interesting in time to see how much of the f-t-f classroom is transitioned into the web. The explosion of de institutions and online programs has already occurred, and now it is almost a waiting game to see how much is left of the traditional classroom in a couple of years.
Reference
Bates & Poole, Chapter 7, "Approaches to the Design of Technology-Based Learning," pp. 153-179
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Teacher-to-learner versus learner-to-learner?
This concept is one that I am very confused as to my own feelings on the issue. Are we moving in the correct direction with the model changing from teacher-to-learner to learner-to-learner? Is their not a reason we have an instructor as the head of the class? Wouldn’t there be a large amount of misinterpreted data being shared with the learner-to-learner model? I struggle to find the logical meaning in having students teach themselves and other students; as I think they miss a crucial aspect of the learning process; which, is someone who has experienced the field or studied it in great length, teaching those who have not. Isn’t the point of higher education to be an apprentice, and learn a field of study that will promote our careers in that field?
Don't take this the wrong way, I do understand that distance education students are and need to be "self directed" and I do believe that many courses are materials handed to students, and students decode what has been given to them; however, I think we need to make sure instructors guide discussions with (some room for non guided discussion), and not all non guided discussions. This may sound a little confusing and I hope this is not the case. It is important that there is someone that not only structures the course, but also guides the course (structured and not all flexible model).
The flexible approach has many benefits and I think the most important benefit is that it teaches the student to be more creative and autonomous in their own studies. However, I believe you can be an autonomous learner without having a free from structure course. The conclusion that I am drawing is that a healthy mix of flexible and structured learning is the most productive teaching model. One of the benefits of the flexible model is that it allows for more perspectives and a more in-depth conversation in the classroom. All in all, I do believe a professor or experienced instructor should head the class and guide the information flow in the direction in which was pre-set to the start of the course.
References
Bates & Poole, Chapter 7, "Approaches to the Design of Technology-Based Learning," pp. 153-179
The development of online courses. In T. Anderson. & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning (Second Edition). Retrieved July 29, 2008, from http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/second_edition.html.
Don't take this the wrong way, I do understand that distance education students are and need to be "self directed" and I do believe that many courses are materials handed to students, and students decode what has been given to them; however, I think we need to make sure instructors guide discussions with (some room for non guided discussion), and not all non guided discussions. This may sound a little confusing and I hope this is not the case. It is important that there is someone that not only structures the course, but also guides the course (structured and not all flexible model).
The flexible approach has many benefits and I think the most important benefit is that it teaches the student to be more creative and autonomous in their own studies. However, I believe you can be an autonomous learner without having a free from structure course. The conclusion that I am drawing is that a healthy mix of flexible and structured learning is the most productive teaching model. One of the benefits of the flexible model is that it allows for more perspectives and a more in-depth conversation in the classroom. All in all, I do believe a professor or experienced instructor should head the class and guide the information flow in the direction in which was pre-set to the start of the course.
References
Bates & Poole, Chapter 7, "Approaches to the Design of Technology-Based Learning," pp. 153-179
The development of online courses. In T. Anderson. & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning (Second Edition). Retrieved July 29, 2008, from http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/second_edition.html.
Standards of Online Education
One important quote from Caplan and Graham in the Development of Online Learning, "one way to address concerns about inferior pedagogy online is to dictate the same educational standards must apply to the development of instruction for the Internet," this statement will be the foundation of this blog (p. 251). Distance education courses have always had a perception from many people as being the easy way around a hard class. Obviously, this is an error in the notion. However, I often wonder why it came to be that online learning was thought to be easier? Many of us who take online courses, certainly, would not agree that online learning is easier. In fact, my opinion is that online courses require more participation and self direction.
Anyway, what Caplan and Graham are saying is the two types of pedagogy need to instill the same standards to keep the online education system on the same set of standards as the traditional education system. The goal of an educational institution is to ultimately educate the students on the educational pursuits that they so choose. However, with the institutionalization of online learning the institute needs to make sure that the online courses share the standards that are set forth for face-to-face institutions. This will in the end, eliminate the question of "inferiority" amongst the different methods of learning. I hope this all makes sense. Comments are welcome.
References
Caplan, D., & Graham, R. (2008). Technologies of Online Learning (E-learning). In T. Anderson. T. (Ed.), Theory and practice of online learning (Second Edition). (pp. 143-165). Retrieved July 18, 2008, from http://www.aupress.ca/books/Terry_Anderson/mcgreal.pdf
Anyway, what Caplan and Graham are saying is the two types of pedagogy need to instill the same standards to keep the online education system on the same set of standards as the traditional education system. The goal of an educational institution is to ultimately educate the students on the educational pursuits that they so choose. However, with the institutionalization of online learning the institute needs to make sure that the online courses share the standards that are set forth for face-to-face institutions. This will in the end, eliminate the question of "inferiority" amongst the different methods of learning. I hope this all makes sense. Comments are welcome.
References
Caplan, D., & Graham, R. (2008). Technologies of Online Learning (E-learning). In T. Anderson. T. (Ed.), Theory and practice of online learning (Second Edition). (pp. 143-165). Retrieved July 18, 2008, from http://www.aupress.ca/books/Terry_Anderson/mcgreal.pdf
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Virtual Worlds
One of the interesting concepts learned thus far in OMDE 603, is the concept of the Virtual Worlds. This is amazing, not the technology; rather, the use of the technology. Who would have thought that computer games and online worlds would have turned into a way of accomplishing a collegiate level education? Going back to the synchronous and asynchronous technologies, this sort of system allows for a great number of possibilities in regards to the diversification of communication. A student can tour around the campus (virtually mind you) and then go to class, without ever being physically present.
The hard part is guiding instructors to use the system. I think this type of system has many flaws and more flaws will be developed in time, like any other quality Web site invention. However, I think the Virtual Worlds have a lot to offer distance education, if the people involved give them a chance. One interesting thing aspect I was thinking about while I was watching all of the videos on Virtual Worlds, was how easy it is going to make peoples lives. Imagine you are living in PA and are interested in a school in CA, why travel all of that way to be disappointed, join a virtual world and take a peek at the campus. Additionally, imagine wondering what your house would look like painted a certain color; why not paint it in the virtual world first? I am going to stop the banter, but I must say that I am impressed with the videos on virtual worlds.
References
Moody, M., Oh, Y., Boucher, R. Educational Uses of Second Life (video, duration 7:00). Retrieved August 25, 2008, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOFU9oUF2HA
The hard part is guiding instructors to use the system. I think this type of system has many flaws and more flaws will be developed in time, like any other quality Web site invention. However, I think the Virtual Worlds have a lot to offer distance education, if the people involved give them a chance. One interesting thing aspect I was thinking about while I was watching all of the videos on Virtual Worlds, was how easy it is going to make peoples lives. Imagine you are living in PA and are interested in a school in CA, why travel all of that way to be disappointed, join a virtual world and take a peek at the campus. Additionally, imagine wondering what your house would look like painted a certain color; why not paint it in the virtual world first? I am going to stop the banter, but I must say that I am impressed with the videos on virtual worlds.
References
Moody, M., Oh, Y., Boucher, R. Educational Uses of Second Life (video, duration 7:00). Retrieved August 25, 2008, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOFU9oUF2HA
Synchronous versus Asynchronous
Alright, so here we go fully capable of blogging. One of the most educational aspects of the course; thus far, was the learning of synchronous and asynchronous technologies. I just finished the assignment I, and I am amazed by the terminology that has already been developed. I truly believe that Module 2A was the start of the entire course. I have been doing a lot of the required reading and it's amazing some of the different technologies deployed both synchronously and asynchronously.
One of the many issues that I have been having with learning about the two types of communication is that they are rarely ever used in combination. I think the majority of distance education courses are focusing too strongly on one type of communication, and avoiding the other communication methods all together. I don't want to go to deep into the session; however, the Wimba session was a perfect example of diversifying the methods of communication. The majority of the time we use asynchronous technologies as a mode of communication in this course (OMDE 603); however, to have a mix up and communicate via Wimba (synchronous) adds a lot to the course. One of my complaints about the majority of asynchronous courses is the lack of personal touch and the interaction is too distance. The problem I have with synchronous is that too much of it takes away from distance education and a student may as well take the class on campus (if available). See you on the next topic....
One of the many issues that I have been having with learning about the two types of communication is that they are rarely ever used in combination. I think the majority of distance education courses are focusing too strongly on one type of communication, and avoiding the other communication methods all together. I don't want to go to deep into the session; however, the Wimba session was a perfect example of diversifying the methods of communication. The majority of the time we use asynchronous technologies as a mode of communication in this course (OMDE 603); however, to have a mix up and communicate via Wimba (synchronous) adds a lot to the course. One of my complaints about the majority of asynchronous courses is the lack of personal touch and the interaction is too distance. The problem I have with synchronous is that too much of it takes away from distance education and a student may as well take the class on campus (if available). See you on the next topic....
Thursday, June 18, 2009
General Reflections
So far, we are on a roll. I wasn't 100% sure of the Distance Education degree at first. However, I am starting to become more and more thrilled with learning all of its entireties. First glance, I have always had an interest in the possibilities that distance education brings to the table; now, it is just putting some of the modern day theories and all of the little peices of the puzzle together to establish a larger perspective for DE. Hope everyone, is enjoying the studies and hopefully we will talk in a specialized communiction tool (such as Wimba) soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
