Week 4 - reading reactions - Blended Content and Assignments

Questions to Ponder

• In what experiences (direct or vicarious) will you have students participate during your blended learning course? In what ways do you see these experiences as part of the assessment process? Which experiences will result in student work that you score?
• First of all ... what do we mean by direct or vicarious experiences? Direct seems to suggest that the student listen, digest and respond to a question with a direct (predictable or desirable response)... while vicarious suggests that the student do much the same but with a less predictable, more creative outcome (no less desired). The focus here in on experience. I would ideally seek to have students demonstrate an understanding of something through "direct" response and eventually encourage them to become more discriminatory in the use of a "concept" or "idea" with a more "vicarious" experience (one more authentic). The "direct" response would lend itself more to Formative assessment .. while the later would lend itself to being more Summative. 
• How will you present content to students in the blended learning course you are designing? Will students encounter content only in one modality (e.g., face-to-face only), or will you devise an approach in which content is introduced in one modality and elaborated upon in the other? What will this look like?
• I've cheated a bit this time. Based on my interpretation of the readings, I should be presenting the course in modules and standardizing the way that I present each module (e.g. headings and subheadings) so that the student comes to know what is expected in each. I should like to design these so that online activities complement face to face activities and vice versa so students also become familiar with these processes and can then focus just on the tasks at hand (and not be burdened with having to learn a new approach or sequence). Would expect to invite students to view online an introduction to a concept .. perhaps reflect on it, then have them come to class where these ideas are presented in more detailed, then invite students to practice these concepts both in class and online (graduated in difficulty) and then as an instructor observe student online efforts to pinpoint general problems that can be discussed in class but then also work with problems individual students may be having.  
• Will there be a consistent pattern to the presentation of content, introduction of learning activities, student submission of assignments, and instructor feedback (formal and informal) in your blended learning course? How can you ensure that students experience your course as one consistent whole rather than as two loosely connected learning environments?
• I think I've already answered this question in my response directly above. Yes by trying to standardize the presentation, types of engagement and methods of review, I breed familiarity and comfort in students thus focusing their attention less on technology and more on the concepts to be learned. 
• How can specific technologies help you present content, provide meaningful experiences, and pitch integration to students in your blended course? With your planned technology use, are you stretching yourself, biting off more than you can chew, or just maintaining the status quo?
• I can choose technologies that help provide students with the appropriate type of interaction that I'm seeking from them and at a time, manner and place that is most appropriate for them too. Case in point, how to invite students to write more frequently and get feedback more frequently so that they can begin to master writing? I do so by inviting them to use tech tools in class that invite them to write anonymously yet still get feedback at the early stages of their writing.... and then gradually move towards making their work more public as they are expected to move to making their writing "more public". 

My notes

Seems to be stating the obvious but online work needs to be relevant to in class work and/or experiences .. and it needs to be perceived as such by the learners. In other words, "integrate online with face to face, so there aren't two separate courses". To do otherwise, invites the question from learners "Why are we doing this?"   The pay back? Student should be able to be more engaged in the learning practice .. learning activities are not add ons but actually reinforce earlier presented concepts.

But how? Article seems to stress the importance of using a basic framework and repeating the use of it so students become more familiar with it and actually come to expect it. Recommendation? Present materials or topics in a module form and even structure each module in a consistent organizational manner .. so the focus is on the content of the module rather than on the need to relearn the organizational structure of a module each time  (e.g. how it all fits together)

I've seen all sorts of methods for this.. I've even used a few of my own. This one was (and still is) used for introducing a "learning tool" for promoting targeted integration into a teacher's practice.

• Introduction 
• What is it? (description) 
• Why bother? (rationale) 
• What's in it for me? (benefits, theory)
• How can I realize those? (methods) 
• Obstacles (managing problems) 
• What others have said? (testimonials)  
• Your thoughts? (invite sharing of experiences - successes / failures; reinforcing or re-defining best practices)
• References 

Another more simple but so elegant framework is this one (currently being used to help in the design of a badge earning ecosystem). 

• Learn (acquire knowledge / understanding of a topic)
• Do (practice applying / mastering the topic within a safe circle of learners / supporters) 
• Share (sharing the mastery with others outside a circle of learners; sharing the experience with peers)  

There is a mention of Dee Fink who seems to echo the above with

• plan for student encounter with content (learning) 
• participate in active experiences (do) 
• share personal reflections / experience (share)  

Then there was the topic of learning activities for active learning (chart below). I reflected on the work that I've doing in COL 140 and which of these activities may already be in place.

I noticed how I was already involving students in direct experience of writing and responding to a prompt in a Basic Composition course that I teach, through the use of Today's Meet (sentence, short response), Padlet (paragraph response), and EdPuzzle (listen, learn, reflect, respond on short answer). Also noted was how the mobile learning project in the same course offered much more freedom to experience and apply what the student had learned to realize a something much more engaging and potentially authentic.

I have noticed how consistent use of these tools makes it easier for students to respond .. especially as they become more comfortable not only with using the tool but in how I use it to benefit them.

Closing point 

I found much of this week's content was already somewhat familiar to me but that was also somewhat reassuring. Some of the key concepts - consistently using a design framework, keeping f2f and online activities relevant and supportive of one another - were already evident to me. What was perhaps helpful was the need to clearly identify the interaction between student and teacher if one hoped to  stimulate a desired outcome. For example, the need for the teacher to be clear about the type of  feedback to give.... if we are expecting a certain response to a question from a student. It seems so obvious and yet it needs to be stated.

Video

References

A Working, Self-Study Guide on: - GuidetoCourseDesignAug05.pdf. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.deefinkandassociates.com/GuidetoCourseDesignAug05.pdf

Fink, D. (n.d.). A self-directed guide to designing courses for significant learning. Retrieved from https://www.deefinkandassociates.com/GuidetoCourseDesignAug05.pdf

Hirtz, S., & Harper, D. G. (2008). Education for a Digital World: Advice, Guidelines and Effective Practice from Around Globe. Commonwealth of Learning, Vancouver and BC Campus, Canada. Retrieved from http://dspace.col.org/handle/11599/52

Kaminski, J., & Currie, S. (2008). Planning your online course. In Education for a Digital World: Advice, Guidelines, and Effective Practice from Around the Globe. Retrieved from http://www.colfinder.org/materials/Education_for_a_Digital_World/Education_for_a_Digital_World_part2.pdf

Liyoshi, T., & Vijay Kumar, M. S. (n.d.). Opening Up Education. Retrieved March 25, 2016, from https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/opening-education

NCAM. (n.d.). Invent + Build / Web + Multimedia / Accessible Digital Media Guidelines. Retrieved March 25, 2016, from http://ncam.wgbh.org/invent_build/web_multimedia/accessible-digital-media-guide

Online @UCF. (2016, March 1). Open Source Digital Content - List | Diigo. Retrieved March 25, 2016, from https://www.diigo.com/list/onlineucf/repository

Survey of Technology Tools for Student Engagement. (n.d.). Retrieved March 25, 2016, from https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ttqi7NuVhEAdhcki_G-y-k13ef-0sw9Y74Mg1m9uoHc/edit?usp=sharing&usp=embed_facebook