Communication Tools for Online Teachers

Online teachers say that students view e-mail as archaic, and although it is still a good way for teachers to communicate, many virtual students prefer instant messaging, videoconferencing and social networking. Experts say calling or texting students is often the best way to communicate with students. "The phone is all about delivering the message that I care about you [the student], and let's learn together, and let me facilitate learning your way," one teacher said. Virtual teachers also are making use of blogs and wikis, but experts say those methods have the potential to be ineffective when it comes to reaching out to students. Education Week (9/22)

Interactive lecture: How to Engage Students and Deepen Comprehension

Harvey F. Silver and Matthew J. Perini, joint authors of best-selling books on education, have recently developed a new Strategic Teacher PLC Guide focused on the Interactive Lecture. Their latest professional-development tool teaches educators how to improve their students' abilities to think actively about the content of a lecture and lock the critical information in their memories. It explores how teachers can plan and evaluate lessons, as well as review and utilize the student work that results.

• Read sample chapters.
• Learn about the authors.

Elluminate Wins Silver for Best Advance in Technology for Virtual Classroom, Training, or Conferencing

Elluminate, Inc., the leading provider of web, audio, video, and social networking solutions for 21^st century education and training, won a coveted Brandon Hall silver award for technology excellence in the Best Advance in Technology for Virtual Classroom, Training, or Conferencing category.  Elluminate’s win was announced on Thursday, April 29.  For a complete list of winners, visit  www.brandon-hall.com.

The Brandon Hall Excellence in Learning Technology Awards are presented by Brandon Hall Research, one of the leading research firms in training and development.  The Learning Technology Awards program showcases innovations in the products in the marketplace for creating and managing learning, talent, and performance.  The entries were evaluated by independent judges around the world.

Flagship product Elluminate Live!® was evaluated on the basis of features and functionality, ease of use, and unique differentiators.  A virtual environment optimized for learning, Elluminate Live! enables teachers and learners to interact and collaborate in real time to add synchronous content to asynchronous distance learning or combine blended online/onsite learning activities, all while reducing travel-related costs.

“These outstanding tools and systems propel the learning profession forward,” said Brandon Hall, Ph.D., chairman of the Awards program.  “These innovative products let customers make learning faster, better, and easier.”

“Receiving this prestigious award validates Elluminate’s strengths in the eLearning, online collaboration, and web conferencing arena,” said Elluminate President Maurice Heiblum.  “For almost a decade, Elluminate has focused on the needs of educators and learners.  Our unique approach facilitates instant communication, continuous collaboration, and learning that is accessible, personal, and meaningful.”

About Brandon Hall Research
Brandon Hall, Ph.D. is the CEO of Brandon Hall Research and author of the ground-breaking “Web-Based Training Cookbook.” Since 1992, Brandon Hall Research (www.brandon-hall.com) has been providing independent research reports and expert advice on using technology in learning. Brandon Hall Research conducts Awards programs each year to recognize the best in innovative learning.

Teachers calculate value of games at math workshop

Educators in a Colorado district are learning new ways to provide differentiated instruction in math, thanks to a series of workshops by Nanci Smith, a consultant with ASCD. Teaching math and problem-solving skills through hands-on activities like puzzles and card games can be "more fun and engaging than problems on a worksheet," said Smith, who used many of the games during her tenure as a high-school math teacher. Journal-Advocate (Sterling, Colo.)

Schools are using robotics to teach math and science

Educators in some Washington state schools are using robotics projects as a hands-on way for students to learn math and science as well as improve teamwork, innovation and problem-solving skills. Members of the business community hope the program will also spur an interest in science and technology careers. "It's so empowering to children to build something and program it to do something, and it does it. It's better than any video game," one teacher said. The Spokesman-Review (Spokane, Wash.)

Study Finds That Online Education Beats the Classroom

A recent 93-page report on online education, conducted by SRI International for the Department of Education concluded that “On average, students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction.”

The report actually reviewed quantitative studies conducted from 1996-2008 that compared online and f2f versions of the same courses. On average, those in the f2f courses scored in the 50 percentile while those in the online versions scored in the 59th. It is a modest but significant difference. The report validates online learning as a viable alternative, which could significantly impact in transforming the educational experience.

What I found interesting in the comments that followed was that several people commented that instead of showing causation, the study actually shows correlation. The population of people taking course online tend to be a self-selected group. They are often older, more motivated individuals. They tend have greater access to technology in order to participate in online learning. What no one brought up was retention rates for f2f vs online. How many students started out in an online class but dropped? Those that continued and finished the class would definitely be the more motivated, independent learners.

Another trend in the conversation related to how we learn--whether independently or in community. Several comments reflected the idea that community could not be adequately created online. Although I agree that it is more difficult because of the distance and lack of body language cues, I disagree that online learners have to forgo community. I think the growth of social networks such as Facebook and Nings or even Yahoo and Google Groups shows that the Internet can actually bring people together.

In order to create an online learning community, however, takes forethought and facilitation. It should be a primary goal of the course. All too often students report that they feel isolated from their peers and colleagues, that they crave the human interaction. That's what discussion boards, chat sessions, video conferencing, group projects are for. As the article points out, "Until fairly recently, online education amounted to little more than electronic versions of the old-line correspondence courses. That has really changed with arrival of Web-based video, instant messaging and collaboration tools." If we are to truly transform education, then we need to look at how technology affords us (and our students) to do things we were not previously able to do/see/hear.

HBCUs and Online Learning

I have decided that I want my population for my dissertation to be 4-year, liberal arts HBCUs--I'm thinking in Georgia and/or South Carolina. I had been tossing that around last year when I took my qualitative class. I went to Academic Search Premier and ProQuest Dissertations to start. I typed in variations of HBCU, technology, adoption, online learning, distance education, course management system, Blackboard, WebCT. I found very few empirical studies utilizing HBCUs. In fact, I found very few discussions period. I did a Google search and search in Questia also. With similar results. Therefore, I sensed a gap in the literature.

In one blog (HBCU-Levers) I found the discussion of DLL (Digital Learning Lab) sponsored by Howard University. Among other things, DLL tracks HBCU participation in distance education. I found a report (2007) where they compared information from HBCU websites to the data gathered by Sloan-C surveys (which I used in my literature review to discuss the development of online learning over the past five years). I added the information about HBCUs to my lit review. In general HBCUs have been slower to adopt. In 2007, 40/103 HBCUs offered online courses—39%. However, I wonder at the penetration. How many courses are offered? How many online programs are offered? DLL did note that too many HBCUs still tend to ask their faculties build too many components themselves—even though all of the institutions employed a course management system (usually Blackboard or WebCT).

One thing that I had not paid attention to originally was that the Sloan-C surveys (and the DLL report) only looked at totally online courses. They didn't measure the level of adoption of web-based technologies (i.e. hybrid/blended learning or web-facilitated courses). I tried to see if there was information on this but ran into a semantic problem. What keywords would be used?

One of the questions I'm thinking of looking at is how the course management systems are used. That would deal with what features are used as well as what teaching practices are incorporated into their usage. I'd like to know whether the CMSs are simply used as document repositories (and essentially duplicating the in-class lecture format) or whether instructors are taking advantage of the various technologies to facilitate the class and then going the next step to integrating the technology into their assessments, etc. Several articles I've read decry the rigidity of course management systems. How does the integrated approach impact instructor's pedagogy? Limited research has been done on the influence of online learning on teaching practices in general. This takes it one step further.

Types of Interaction in Online Learning

In his editorial entitled “Three Types of Interaction,” Michael G. Moore suggests that distance educators need to agree on the distinctions between three types of interaction, which he labeled 1) learner-content interaction, 2) learner-instructor interaction, and 3) learner-learner interaction. He also notes, “The main weakness of many distance education programs is their commitment to only one type of medium. When there is only one medium it is probable that only one kind of interaction is permitted or done well.”

Learner-instructor interactions

The most common form of interaction in many classrooms—whether online or face-to-face—is learner-instructor. The instructor presents information (or causes them to be made); organizes the students’ application of information and ideas—either through practice of skills or manipulation of information and ideas; organize assessment procedures to determine students’ progress and to inform changes in teaching strategies. For the most part, the instructor is the students’ primary audience. In addition, the instructor may also provide counsel, support and encouragement—though the amount may vary according to the learners’ abilities and teacher’s personality and philosophy.

Learner-content interactions

This is the primary aim of education—where the learner intellectually interacts with the content, resulting in changes in the learner’s understanding, perspective, or cognitive structure of his/her brain. Texts were initially designed to impart knowledge—not to entertain—generally a one-way form of communication. However, with today’s technology, learners are able to interact not only with written text, but also with content broadcast on radio and television, with electronic recordings on CDs, video/DVD, and computer software. Moore notes “The frequency and intensity of the teacher's influence on learners when there is learner-teacher interaction is much greater than when there is only learner-content interaction.” Blogs and wikis, however, provide learners with new avenues to create their own content and publish to a wider audience—beyond just the instructor.

Learner-learner interactions

Moore suggests that the third form of interaction will challenge our thinking and teaching practices—especially related to online learning. Inter-learner interactions—between one learner and other learners, alone or in a group, with our without a synchronous instructor presence—has been deemed extremely valuable, if not essential, to the learning process in our modern globalized society. Online tools provide an alternative for large classes to interact in smaller groups and to extend the conversations beyond the classroom. In totally online courses, learner-learner interactions become even more important means for building community and avoiding learner isolation. Learner-learner interactions such as discussion boards and group work allow learners the chance to reflect on their learning and to share those ideas with their fellow learners. Through groupwork, learners have the opportunity to create thoughts, share those thoughts with others, and hear others’ reactions. The resulting group analysis, debate, and shared perspectives help them develop conceptual learning and higher order thinking skills. Furthermore, groups provide support and mutual feedback that promote self-understanding and generate an experiential foundation for learning (MacDonald, 2002).

Learner-Interface Interactions

New information technology and media have added new dimensions and possibilities to the conduct of teaching and learning, creating the potential for more interactive, interpersonal, group environments. Therefore, Hillman, Willis, and Gunawardena (1994) propose a fourth type of interaction, learner-interface. They argue that the types of interaction identified by Moore (1996) do not consider the “the interaction that occurs when a learner must use these intervening technologies to communicate with the content, negotiate meaning, and validate knowledge with the instructor and other learners” (Hillman et al., p. 30-31). Therefore, the learner must be skilled in using the delivery system or he/she may not be able to participate in any of the other types of interactions.

More Interactions

In more recent research, Northrup and Rasmussen (2000, cited in Sharp & Huett, 2005) advocate the addition of learner-feedback interaction, which involves closing the communications loop--providing the learner confirmation of receipt and accuracy of what was sent. Sutton (2001, cited in Sharp & Huett, 2005) proposes another type of interaction—vicarious interaction, which is based on the “principle that enhanced achievement and satisfaction may occur even when all students do not interact directly” (p. 224). In other words, learners can learn vicariously by observing the interaction of other students such as “when a student actively observes and processes both sides of a direct interaction between two other students or between another student and the instructor” (Sutton, p. 227).

Not only is it important to define and distinguish the types of interaction that occur in distance learning, but it is also equally important to carefully design interactions into the learning environment so that all relevant types of interaction are represented. Northrup (2001, cited in Sharp & Huett, 2005) suggests a framework of “interaction attributes” that can be employed—interaction with content, collaboration, conversation, intrapersonal interaction and performance support. Collaborative interactions are an essential element of any pedagogy which assumes that learning is a social endeavor and that understanding comes through modeling, reflection, participation in, and reaction to the behaviors and thoughts of others. Distance education, more than ever, allows learners the opportunity to interact not only with the content and the instructor but also to gain new insights through their interactions with their fellow classmates. As MacDonald notes, “While current research may not be able to ascertain which type of interaction is most valuable or necessary to students in distance education, it seems plausible that, given all the documented benefits of learning communities, the quality of distance education should improve with renewed focus on incorporating learner-learner interaction.”

Seven Principles of Effective Teaching and Online Learning

Eugenia Conway, Assistant Director of The Teaching Academy at New Mexico State University notes that “Many instructors of traditional courses who rightly believe that learning is a social process consider ‘same-time same-place’ interaction central to a successful educational experience’” (American Federation of Teachers quoted in Conway, 2003). They dispute whether students can get an equivalent education online. Therefore, one way to ensure that quality remains in online learning is to review Chickering & Gamson’s principles, which were based on 50 years of research and have been considered the standard for best practices for over 25 years. Her paper relates the Seven Principles to online learning: Teaching Strategies for Distance Education: Implementing the Seven Principles for Good Practice in Online Education. Not only does the paper provide specific ways that technology can enhance teaching and learning, but it also contains a discussion about “opposing paradigms”—teacher-centered (traditional, positivism) vs. student-centered (constructivism) classrooms and provides specifics for developing rubrics and electronic portfolios.

I also came across the following resource which provides a, "A Framework for the Pedagogical Evaluation of eLearning Environments". The paper uses Chickering & Gamson's (1987) 'Seven Principles of Effective Teaching' as the framework for examining the potential of Virtual Learning Environments to enhance learning. It also includes a questionnaire based on the viable system and conversational models articulated by Britain and Liber (2004). The document is made available from Eduforge, "an open access collaborative learning and exploratory environment designed for the sharing of ideas, research outcomes, open source educational software, and tools within a community of educators, researchers and developers."

WebCT Frustrations

I've just started a course entitled Advanced Technologies for Distance Education offered by West Georgia University. The University System of Georgia has now placed all their distance education programs under one roof--WebCT Vista. This is my first time using this platform, and I must admit that I have found it very frustrating. To begin with, WebCT Vista only works with certain JAVA runtime environments as well as certain browser versions--neither of which I was using. In fact, my JAVA versions were more recent. So I spent several hours trying to configure my applications to work with WebCT. Now the Browser Check indicates I have everything installed correctly, but I can't access the HTML Creator--definitely a feature that I would find useful in order to enhance my postings.

Our first assignment had us use HTML code to create an enhanced posting and discuss why knowing HTML could be useful. I must admit that knowing HTML can prove to be very practical. First, in my experience with using Microsoft Publisher to create a webpage, Publisher bloats the HTML code—adding unnecessary code. Remember--every extra line makes your page just that tiny bit slower to load - and all those fractions of a second add up! Many parts of the world are still using dial-up.

Learning HTML can widen your scope - you can look at your code, and understand what it is doing. Making a change to your page will be much easier. Moving parts of your page around can sometimes simply be a matter of moving that section of code. You won't have a lot of extra code that isn't doing anything - and who wants to type more than they have to? So your pages will be quicker to load.

If you want to test your code, try http://www.jmarshall.com/easy/html/testbed_f1.html. You can go to his main page for easy HTML tips.