National Educational Computing Conference 2005Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

ISTE/SIG TE Workshop on Teacher Education

Sunday June 26 Room 108 B Pennsylvania Convention Center 9:00 until 4:00

Topic 4: Online, hybrid, and computer-assisted learning.

Donna Russell, Ph.D.University of Missouri-Kansas CitySchool of Education Assistant Professor Curriculum and Instructional LeadershipLearning Technologies russelldl@umkc.eduhttp://r.web.umkc.edu/russelldl/816.235.5871

Online Professional Development

Background Information Course Design Principles Example of Graduate Course Dialog

“Thus we seek ideas for moving beyond the scaffolding of contributions and relationships, to tools that allow teachers and students to dynamically and reactively structure their history of interactions so as to maximize future learning opportunities.” (Roschelle, Pea, 1999, p. 24)

Online courses

UMKC:New masters in curriculum and instruction with an emphasis on learning technologies (NETS standards)

UMKC Cognition and TechnologyAssessing the Role of

Technology in EducationDevelopment of Learning

Technology ProgramsSpecial Topics in EducationCurriculum Development

Curriculum Organization Advanced Ed Psych

UMSL:The Psychology of Teaching

and Learning

Webster University: Online MAT program- Advanced Child Development

Design Considerations

Considerations during design of the course for developing online dialogs:

course contenttypes of understandings you want the students to develop the students themselves, what are their goals and diversity. whether students work in groups or individuallyevaluation of online dialogs

Asynchoronous Dialogs

Discussion Boards:Defined by initial threads- set up initial question on information in text, lecture. Structured response and can be tied to the development of course concepts

SuggestionsMonitor the db for student responses Define a date of response to keep dialog current to course schedule Set up an listserve type of email initiation of dialog Encourage student addition of information from other sources, correlating concepts and new concepts. –assessment-

Curriculum Development Course

Outside experts

Message no. 161Posted by .. on Friday, June 27, 2003 10:16 am Subject Constructivist Methods in the Classroom

1. When are constructivist methods used effectively in aclassroom? Which topics suit constructivist methods?

While the curriculum and assessment frameworksuggests several learning experiences that teachers canincorporate into the day, all of the learningexperiences are based on a belief about how we shouldteach to match what we know about how students learn.The primary aim of the Project Construct approach is tohelp teachers foster the development of each child as anautonomous learner. Autonomy refers to the ability ofindividuals to be self-governing---socially, morally,and intellectually---in the context of relationshipswith others.

Synchronous Dialogs

Chatrooms:Open forum-more personalized Develops student personal concepts as well as course goal understandingscan be used to develop class dynamics and interactions

Suggestions:Set an agenda; theme; topic; scenario to place the chat in context and structure online timeinvite experts-outsiders to add to scenario, simulation development.

Online Group Dialogs

Online Group projects incorporate group dialogs-communications

Design Online workspace- load

projects, review and edit projects.

Online communication:Students discuss

assigned readings Students establish

schedules and develop projects

Child Development Presentations

Project Title Here

Group name

Advanced Child Development (Summer 2003)

Assessment

Process:Your evaluation processes of online dialogs should consider the initial course goals for the types of understandings you want the students to develop.

Model your assessment process throughout the course

Give students criteria as soon as possible in the course.

Structured responses- assess on the development of course goalsDid they respond to course information and/or add new information from other sources?Make connections among ideas?

Productive Online PD

Open discussions- assess on the progression of student’s individual reconceptualizations- Have they developed new personal understandings of course information? Correlated information to create new functionalities?

Group work- assess on level of contribution to group projectDid they review work, discuss work with others and/or add new information to the project?Add strategies to solve problems, create projects?

Methods:Scaled rubrics points for completionchecklistsself-evaluation

Faculty Responses

Faculty Responses

Design Principle 2The program must provide opportunities for reflection-in-action and reflection-about-action among novices and experts

Design Principle 4The program at every level is organized around state and national program standards

Design Principle 1The program at every level is

organized around the problems of practice

EFFECTIVE EDUCATORS are

REFLECTIVE and

INQUIRING PROFESSIONALS

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKDESIGN MODELUMKC School of EducationMasters Degree in Curriculum and Instructional Leadership with an Emphasis on Learning Technologies

Design Principle 3Evaluations of candidates must

include assessment ofperformance in complex

situations of practiceappropriate to thepractitioner’s level

Program Matrix

Competency Phases

Design Development Implementation

Cognitive Theory and Technology

Cognition and TechnologyOnline

Assessment with TechnologyOnline

Curriculum InternshipThe design of a new

learning technology program.online

Instructional

Design and Technology

Instructional Design in the 21st Century

Curriculum and Instructional Technology

Action Research: Implementation of a new technology

program. blended

Learning Technologie

s And

Mediational Effects.

Assessing the Role of

Technology in EducationOnline

Development of Learning

Technologies Programsonline

Culminating Event-Thesis Project: Evaluate research

program on technology

program and write thesis paper.blended

Development of Learning Technologies ProgramsEDCI 573 online courseMasters of Arts in Curriculum and InstructionEmphasis Area: Learning Technologies

Course Description The purpose of this course is to review a variety of technology programs

currently implemented in traditional and non-traditional settings. The course readings will expose students to a wide variety of technology-based learning environments in order to develop the students’ conceptual understanding of the potential benefits and costs of developing technology programs.

Intended Learning Outcomes This course is part of a program to develop educators with the capability to

design, develop, and evaluate learning technologies into a variety of learning environments. The students will research topics, dialog in online workgroups, write proposal papers, present their final solution, and evaluate other group’s projects. In this course the learners will:

Design and develop a plan for implementation of a technology-based program.

Evaluate the effectiveness of the plan of actions designed in this course.

Learner Activities 1. Students in this course will design a strategy to address a problem

using a technology-based solution. They will work online in collaborative groups in order to design a plan of action.

2. The students will work design a program for evaluating the effectiveness of the plan of action and analyze the responses of others.

Potential problems for consideration Design the online curriculum for a graduate course involving professors in differing countries.

Survey all professorsIdentify common trends in curriculumDesign online curriculum

Design an online data mining agenda for the SOE NCATE review in 5 years including:Management of server-- on-site or out source Middleware design Design forms for faculty and students

Design professional development program for new STAR lab at the School of Education Survey of local districts for inservice needs Survey preservice students for needs

In service – on site or in SOEProductivity training for pre service

Design presentation for laptop program for SOE. Research university policyResearch other public universities programsDevelop proposal for laptop program

Develop a wireless handheld programWrite a grant for a technology-based solutionDevelop a pd for a current technology program

Template for Online PBL Unit

create animage of the desiredstate of the system

1

working in pairs within their home school, learners gather and analyze information (physical, scientific, and historical evidence)

to determine the authenticity (Barab & Duffy, 2000; Petroski, 1996) of the problem and to define the scope of the problem in

their community

working in groups across participating schools, learners gather

and analyze information about an area of expertise (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989) and how that area relates to the problem

in the unit; through case study analysis (Bruer, 1993; Shulman,

1992), learners examine areas of expertise in practice, develop a lens through which to view the practice, and determine the

interdependence of the areas of expertise

working in jigsaw groups (Aronson, Blaney, Stephan, Sikes, & Snapp, 1978) within their home schools, learners develop a

solution to the problem and assess the feasibility of that solution

from the perspectives of the experts within the group and the needs of the representative communities

INQUIRY PROCESSES

INQUIRY PROCESSES

INQUIRY PROCESSES

PHASE 1

PHASE 2

PHASE 3

Why is the problem important to my community?

How can we use our expertise to better understandthe problem and develop a feasible solution?

How can we use the knowledge and skills from Phase 1and Phase 2 to develop a feasible solution?

DESIGN PROBLEM SOLVING

INPUT

OUTPUT

OUTPUT

OUTPUT

prior knowledge andmisconceptions

PROBLEM SPACE(Benathy, 1996; Lawson, 1990; )Glegg, 1969

artifact; rationale forthe relevancy of theproblem to their community

artifact; conceptual under-standing of an area ofexpertise and its applicationto solving the problem

artifact; representation ofthe group’s solution andconclusion about its short-and long-term feasibility

(re)negotiate designinquiry boundaries

2

(re)articulate ashared vision of the

future system

3

outline thespecifications

of the future system

4

develop and testthe model of thefuture system

5

OUTPUT USEDAS INPUT

OUTPUT USEDAS INPUT

knowledge that diversecommunity needs impactthe complexity of the problem(Bereiter, 2002)

knowledge that a problemcan look different and beunderstand differently frommultiple perspectives

OUTCOMEknowledge has properties ofuse and value; is somethingthat can be used andresponded to

E

E

E

E

E

SNS™ COMMUNITY

PBL Phase 1

create an

image of the desiredstate of the system

1

working in pairs within their home school, learners gather and

analyze information (physical, scientific, and historical evidence)

to determine the authenticity (Barab & Duffy, 2000; Petroski,

1996) of the problem and to define the scope of the problem in

their community

INQUIRY PROCESSES

PHASE 1Why is the problem important to my community?

DESIGN PRO BLEM SOLVING

INPUT

OUTPUT

prior knowledge andmisconceptions

PROBLEM SPACE(Benathy, 1996; Lawson, 1990; )Glegg, 1969

artifact; rationale forthe relevancy of theproblem to their community

OUTPUT USEDAS INPUTknowledge that diversecommunity needs impactthe complexity of the problem(Bereiter, 2002)

SNS™ CO MMUNITY

First ArtifactHand Held GroupOnline Higher Ed Group

PBL Phase 2

working in groups across participating schools, learners gather

and analyze information about an area of expertise (Brown,

Collins, & Duguid, 1989) and how that area relates to the problem

in the unit; through case study analysis (Bruer, 1993; Shulman,

1992), learners examine areas of expertise in practice, develop a

lens through which to view the practice, and determine the

interdependence of the areas of expertise

INQUIRY P ROCESSES

P HASE 2How can we use our expertise to better understandthe problem and develop a feasible solution?

OUTPUTartifact; conceptual under-standing of an area ofexpertise and its applicationto solving the problem

(re)negotiate designinquiry boundaries

2

(re)articulate a

shared vision of thefuture system

3

OUTPUT USEDAS INPUTknowledge that a problemcan look different and beunderstand differently frommultiple perspectives

E

Second artifacts Hand held groupOnline higher ed group

PBL Phase 3

working in jigsaw groups (Aronson, Blaney, Stephan, Sikes, &

Snapp, 1978) within their home schools, learners develop a

solution to the problem and assess the feasibility of that solution

from the perspectives of the experts within the group and the

needs of the representative communities

INQUIRY P ROCESSES

P HASE 3How can we use the knowledge and skills from Phase 1and Phase 2 to develop a feasible solution?

OUTPUTartifact; representation ofthe group’s solution andconclusion about its short-and long-term feasibility

outline thespecifications

of the future system

4

develop and test

the model of thefuture system

5

OUTCOMEknowledge has properties ofuse and value; is somethingthat can be used andresponded to

E

E

E

E

Curriculum Internship =SS2005

Handhelds Group Present PD for Continuing Ed Present PD for Board

Online Curriculum Design Present research results to collaborating

professors Develop second iteration of curriculum model Initiate second iteration of data gathering Write presentation of panel symposium for

AERA

Questions and Concepts

Online Learning Knowledge formation online Conceptual knowing online Dialogs online (CMC)

Design of Online Learning Environments Quality interactions online Quality of process online Quality of product online