I have decided to read chapters eight and nine this week in Empowering Online Learning by Bonk & Zhang, (2008). The reading, reflecting, displaying and doing (R2D2) theoretical framework extends the “doing” activities for hands on learners. The pragmatic question implied in chapter eight asks “what do we do now,” and gives guidelines to help the learner express their new acquired knowledge. Simulations can imitate reality situations and challenge the learner with viable situations accommodating new found information, while game playing can add a flavor of fun with a bit of competiveness.
Simulating in the medical field can, in fact, assume a real life situation without the cost of a life. While it would be awe inspiring to assist the learner with real life critical situations, cost for the programs could be disadvantage, especially for a state community college. Online case scenarios are within reach and with the versatility of the internet, most computer systems can accommodate this type of learning without much adjustment. Our college uses Web CT for online testing and is already formatted for discussion groups, case scenarios, games, resources for research, as well as, the current page used for exam purposes.
Wiki’s can be used as an adjunct site to list further practice scenarios or discussion questions, depending on the need. Using other websites will assist the student to learn the internet and introduce sites foreign to them. If needed, SurveryShare, is available to help with data collection as a component of active learning, in a real “world” setting. The key to chapter eight is doing something with newly learned knowledge or skills and gives practical concepts to subsidize the learning process as described by the R2D2 framework model.
Chapter nine gives outcome measures with examples for all the doer strategies discussed in chapter eight. Our school currently uses action research for a community research project that has been changed, this year, to include online postings and guidance from the instructor. Next year this project will be 95% online with an in class presentation for peer review and according to, Bonk & Zhang,
(2008), the learner-centered index is high which gives the project validity.
Content review games, such as jeopardy, bingo, hangman, and word puzzles are user friendly and assist with knowledge retention by actively doing Having the students design a puzzle by using a website such as Puzzlemaker, to test other students is a great idea! Of course, online resources are a must for student research and adding a glossary would be very fruitful. Already, our nursing course lists words in a syllabus for the student’s benefit, so the alternative of devising a plan to have the students share in the responsibility of finding definitions and adding them to the online site is sensational!
As always, new knowledge can produce trepidation and when it stretches a student’s ability and takes them out of their comfort zone, they can be paralyzed with fear. “Doing” can reduce those fears and help the learner gain confidence with new skills, while having fun doing it!
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Reflections/Week 10
I have to smile, when reading the task analysis for preparing a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. I was cynical. Then a thought occurred which made me smile broader. A particular movie depicting a young man who was displaced from the African Jungle to experience the American lifestyle knew little of the social existence of a strange place called New York City. He was devoid of all acceptable American standards including the use of silverware, clothing, and suitable behaviors. His caretakers realized they had to include step by step instructions with everything! One funny episode included the young man making a fruit drink in a blender, well, the caretakers forgot to tell him to put on the lid and you can guess what happened! We take so much for granted!
Morrison, Ross, and Kemp (2007) wrote that a topic analysis consists of two types of information including the identification of subject content and how the content is made or the structure of it. They give us the different content structure classifications to aid with teaching design for task analysis. I wish they would have considered topics I could relate to such as fashion design or pedicures/manicures instead of the nails, screws, and bolts that mean nothing to me (I can always consult the subject matter expert (SME)).
I appreciated chapter five and was wide eyed as I discovered all the different types and ways of writing objectives. Prior to this chapter, objectives were unclear and resembled more of goal than instructional purposes. To realize there were domains such as cognitive, psychomotor, and affective gave me insight to the “real” world of writing objectives for instructional planning. To have the observational verbs at my fingertips is a relief and the given examples are great visual tool. I was always guilty of shying away from correcting or writing existing goals because they seemed austere and certainly beyond my expertise. Now I can use either Mager and Beach or Merrill’s models or resort to Bloom’s taxonomy levels, complete with examples, to introduce objectives with focal learning needs in mind!
Different ideas rose as chapter six addressed the sequence of instruction to help the student have greater success with completing the course objectives. Motivation is a key factor in presenting materials and the different sequencing events portrayed in the book give food for thought. Our theory content is limited by the current syllabus and objectives, but realizing all the different instructional methods, winds of change are very near.
I think I am a semantic learner, someone seeking a deeper understanding and wanting higher tests scores, while some of the students definitely fit the phonemic level, not reading for the meaning or learning for application. The teaching steps mentioned in chapter seven are helpful to understand how to plan theory class and achieve the objectives designed for optimal comprehension. Design is often overlooked in the instructional process, but is much needed to assist the learner to master the topic. I like the sequential teaching method of attitudes; it really drives the subject home and gives the learner hands on involvement. After all, from all I have read, student participation is a key component to successful learning!
Reference
Morrison, G., Ross, S., & Kemp, J. (2007). Designing Effective Instruction. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. U.S. A. 76-165.
Morrison, Ross, and Kemp (2007) wrote that a topic analysis consists of two types of information including the identification of subject content and how the content is made or the structure of it. They give us the different content structure classifications to aid with teaching design for task analysis. I wish they would have considered topics I could relate to such as fashion design or pedicures/manicures instead of the nails, screws, and bolts that mean nothing to me (I can always consult the subject matter expert (SME)).
I appreciated chapter five and was wide eyed as I discovered all the different types and ways of writing objectives. Prior to this chapter, objectives were unclear and resembled more of goal than instructional purposes. To realize there were domains such as cognitive, psychomotor, and affective gave me insight to the “real” world of writing objectives for instructional planning. To have the observational verbs at my fingertips is a relief and the given examples are great visual tool. I was always guilty of shying away from correcting or writing existing goals because they seemed austere and certainly beyond my expertise. Now I can use either Mager and Beach or Merrill’s models or resort to Bloom’s taxonomy levels, complete with examples, to introduce objectives with focal learning needs in mind!
Different ideas rose as chapter six addressed the sequence of instruction to help the student have greater success with completing the course objectives. Motivation is a key factor in presenting materials and the different sequencing events portrayed in the book give food for thought. Our theory content is limited by the current syllabus and objectives, but realizing all the different instructional methods, winds of change are very near.
I think I am a semantic learner, someone seeking a deeper understanding and wanting higher tests scores, while some of the students definitely fit the phonemic level, not reading for the meaning or learning for application. The teaching steps mentioned in chapter seven are helpful to understand how to plan theory class and achieve the objectives designed for optimal comprehension. Design is often overlooked in the instructional process, but is much needed to assist the learner to master the topic. I like the sequential teaching method of attitudes; it really drives the subject home and gives the learner hands on involvement. After all, from all I have read, student participation is a key component to successful learning!
Reference
Morrison, G., Ross, S., & Kemp, J. (2007). Designing Effective Instruction. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. U.S. A. 76-165.
Friday, March 27, 2009
Reflective 2
I particularly enjoyed chapter 2 of CSCL 2, which discussed collaborative learning via “computer-supported learning environments.” ( Oshima & Oshima, 2002). According to the writings of several authors including, Scardamalia, Berteiter, and others, learners can externalize their thoughts by the use of texts or graphics (notes) in order to proceed through their own knowledge as a communal effort and utilize the expertise of others for personal advancement. Research provides the means to discern the favorability of communal learning by means of discussion groups for learner advancement which can build further discourse by extending its use to other cultures.
Relationship between the use of technology and instructional strategies/scaffolds between the role of technology and the role of a teacher/instructor/facilitator for this particular study includes:
As described in the study, group A and group B, were expert learners tested in a synchronous and asynchronous style of learning with the introduction of WEB based CSILE as the backdrop for learning activities. According to Keegan, 1996, learning by asynchronous technology was introduced to correspondence schools and does not require that student and facilitator participate together; on the other hand, synchronous instruction requires the student and facilitator join together in “real time” to facilitate student progression (Johnson, 2006).
The use of technology for instructional strategies is supported by Jong & Joolingen, 1998, as an aid for the learner to become an active participant in the process of knowledge attainment by computer based learning environments. Theories mentioned by Reil & Polin suggest that knowledge development is associated with the changing role in the community and should be a socially managed experience. Technology used in this study is based on scientific discourse known as WEBCSILE, in order to challenge the learner and prompt a higher level of understanding.
A teacher strategy for both groups concentrated on placing a greater focus on solving problems in a collaborative manner. Even as, group A, began with note cards to record their thoughts and share with other students, the transition to doing the same via discussion groups worked seamlessly, supporting the advantage of allowing students to view others in the same window and focusing students on the same problems (Koschmann, Hall, & Miyake, 2002).
Another teacher strategy for group A and B provided that the student think focally. Graduate students in the study communicated readily via WEBCSILE that previously was generated in the face to face instructor/student genre. The student’s main goal was for knowledge advancement and could project learning from a different method, as long as, the method fulfilled the learning objective. According to Bonk and Zhang, 2006, online learning increases internalization of the student knowledge base and expands their learning “pursuit.” Dewey projected that learning from active participation with focal direction occurred more often than for those who choose to sit on the side lines and not participate (Koschmann, et al., 2002).
*The instructor was present and accessible for community A, but refrained from furthering the teacher responsibilities, such as analyzing student progression, giving clear instruction, or providing teacher reflections. Without teacher presence, community group B, progressed without clear understanding or guidance.
Group C, the novice learner, was privy to the teacher strategy, which placed the greatest focus on problem-centered collaboration (Koschmann, et. al., 2002).
Question 2: Design of virtual community
I would need the tools such as, PBWIKI, in order to provide the discourse for case studies for the initial set-up. After the researching the success of this site, further options, such as DL2 or ANGEL, could be purchased by the community college to broaden the capabilities of online learning. According to Seely Brown (2007), knowledge has two sides, the explicit which is the concept side and the action side; termed tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge develops between the student and the instructor as shared understanding slowly emerges.
The goals consist of presenting case study questions on PBWIKI that require critical thinking and reasoning. Postings for the studies would correspond to the theory class taught the first of the week and would be due by Friday of the same week. Other exercises could be initiated, which can a self grading system, such as hangman, word puzzles, and quizzes to enhance the understanding of anatomy and physiology and serve as a backdrop for critical thinking. This is a shift from the conventional face-to-face instruction that blends a variety of learning formats and gives the opportunity for an assortment of different learning options (Bonk & Zhang, 2008).
The instructor will design the case studies in accordance with the asynchronous theory content, game activities, and theory definitions and provide student guidance throughout the case study scenarios. Also, the instructor will provide the case study, for example: A 52-year old, with a history of a myocardial infarction is 2 days post op from a coronary bypass. Students will be asked what the initial assessment should focus on, what are the risk factors associated with his past history and his current surgery, what are the educational components for this type of surgery, what are the lab values and medications associated with this type of illness/surgery, and what should be the highest priority nursing diagnosis. With this scenario the student must know the anatomy and physiologies of the heart, read sections in their text book, and listen to theory presented first part of the week. The instructor will guide the discussion online via PBWIKI, to make sure the students stay on task. Dewey (1984) sums up the process of “real” knowledge attainment by discussing the fact that students learn by social involvement with others, adding the thought, “human nature is part of nature (Bonk & Zhang, 2008). Dewey articulated that teachers should not wait for “children” to stumble into experiences that educate them, but instead, the educator should be responsible to create educating experiences for the student (Koschmann, et. al, 2002).
The Read, reflect, display, and do (R2D2) model is described by, Bonk and Zhang (2008), as an educator’s tool to delineate age differences, learning preferences and cultural influences of the students allowing for a successful learning environment (Bonk & Zhang, 2008). This design suggests giving reading materials to the auditory and verbal learner and display for the visual learner. To accommodate the observational learner, short reflective paragraphs can be written in class, after theory, to assist the student through the week with their case studies and provide them with what they know and what they need to study.
References
Bonk, C. & Zhang, K. (2008) Empowering online learning: 100+ Activities for reading, reflection, displaying, & doing. Jossey-Bass, a Wiley Imprint. San Francisco, Ca. 3-7.
Bonk, C. & Zhang, K. (2006). Introducing the R2D2 model: Online learning for the diverse learners of this world. Distance Education. 27(2) 258.
Brown, J. (2007). Learning, working & playing in the digital age. 1999 Conference of American Association for Higher Education. 1-6.
Johnson, G. (2006). Synchronous and asynchronous text-based CMC in educational contexts: A review of recent research. Techtrends.50(4), 46-51.
Jong, T. & Joolingen, W. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Education Research. 68, 1-3.
Koschmann, T., Hall, R., & Miyake, N. (2002), Carrying forward the conversation: CSCL2. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Mahwah, New Jersey. 259-262.
Oshima, J. & Oshima, R. (2002). Coordination of Asynchronous and synchronous communication: Coordination of asynchronous and synchronous communication: Differences in qualities of knowledge advancement discourse between experts and novices. In T. Koschmann, R. Hall & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL 2: Carrying Forward the Conversation. (pp. 55-77). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Reil, M. & Polin, L. (2004). Common ground and critical differences in designing technical environments. In S. Barab R., Kling & J. Gray (Eds.) (pp.16-22).
Relationship between the use of technology and instructional strategies/scaffolds between the role of technology and the role of a teacher/instructor/facilitator for this particular study includes:
As described in the study, group A and group B, were expert learners tested in a synchronous and asynchronous style of learning with the introduction of WEB based CSILE as the backdrop for learning activities. According to Keegan, 1996, learning by asynchronous technology was introduced to correspondence schools and does not require that student and facilitator participate together; on the other hand, synchronous instruction requires the student and facilitator join together in “real time” to facilitate student progression (Johnson, 2006).
The use of technology for instructional strategies is supported by Jong & Joolingen, 1998, as an aid for the learner to become an active participant in the process of knowledge attainment by computer based learning environments. Theories mentioned by Reil & Polin suggest that knowledge development is associated with the changing role in the community and should be a socially managed experience. Technology used in this study is based on scientific discourse known as WEBCSILE, in order to challenge the learner and prompt a higher level of understanding.
A teacher strategy for both groups concentrated on placing a greater focus on solving problems in a collaborative manner. Even as, group A, began with note cards to record their thoughts and share with other students, the transition to doing the same via discussion groups worked seamlessly, supporting the advantage of allowing students to view others in the same window and focusing students on the same problems (Koschmann, Hall, & Miyake, 2002).
Another teacher strategy for group A and B provided that the student think focally. Graduate students in the study communicated readily via WEBCSILE that previously was generated in the face to face instructor/student genre. The student’s main goal was for knowledge advancement and could project learning from a different method, as long as, the method fulfilled the learning objective. According to Bonk and Zhang, 2006, online learning increases internalization of the student knowledge base and expands their learning “pursuit.” Dewey projected that learning from active participation with focal direction occurred more often than for those who choose to sit on the side lines and not participate (Koschmann, et al., 2002).
*The instructor was present and accessible for community A, but refrained from furthering the teacher responsibilities, such as analyzing student progression, giving clear instruction, or providing teacher reflections. Without teacher presence, community group B, progressed without clear understanding or guidance.
Group C, the novice learner, was privy to the teacher strategy, which placed the greatest focus on problem-centered collaboration (Koschmann, et. al., 2002).
Question 2: Design of virtual community
I would need the tools such as, PBWIKI, in order to provide the discourse for case studies for the initial set-up. After the researching the success of this site, further options, such as DL2 or ANGEL, could be purchased by the community college to broaden the capabilities of online learning. According to Seely Brown (2007), knowledge has two sides, the explicit which is the concept side and the action side; termed tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge develops between the student and the instructor as shared understanding slowly emerges.
The goals consist of presenting case study questions on PBWIKI that require critical thinking and reasoning. Postings for the studies would correspond to the theory class taught the first of the week and would be due by Friday of the same week. Other exercises could be initiated, which can a self grading system, such as hangman, word puzzles, and quizzes to enhance the understanding of anatomy and physiology and serve as a backdrop for critical thinking. This is a shift from the conventional face-to-face instruction that blends a variety of learning formats and gives the opportunity for an assortment of different learning options (Bonk & Zhang, 2008).
The instructor will design the case studies in accordance with the asynchronous theory content, game activities, and theory definitions and provide student guidance throughout the case study scenarios. Also, the instructor will provide the case study, for example: A 52-year old, with a history of a myocardial infarction is 2 days post op from a coronary bypass. Students will be asked what the initial assessment should focus on, what are the risk factors associated with his past history and his current surgery, what are the educational components for this type of surgery, what are the lab values and medications associated with this type of illness/surgery, and what should be the highest priority nursing diagnosis. With this scenario the student must know the anatomy and physiologies of the heart, read sections in their text book, and listen to theory presented first part of the week. The instructor will guide the discussion online via PBWIKI, to make sure the students stay on task. Dewey (1984) sums up the process of “real” knowledge attainment by discussing the fact that students learn by social involvement with others, adding the thought, “human nature is part of nature (Bonk & Zhang, 2008). Dewey articulated that teachers should not wait for “children” to stumble into experiences that educate them, but instead, the educator should be responsible to create educating experiences for the student (Koschmann, et. al, 2002).
The Read, reflect, display, and do (R2D2) model is described by, Bonk and Zhang (2008), as an educator’s tool to delineate age differences, learning preferences and cultural influences of the students allowing for a successful learning environment (Bonk & Zhang, 2008). This design suggests giving reading materials to the auditory and verbal learner and display for the visual learner. To accommodate the observational learner, short reflective paragraphs can be written in class, after theory, to assist the student through the week with their case studies and provide them with what they know and what they need to study.
References
Bonk, C. & Zhang, K. (2008) Empowering online learning: 100+ Activities for reading, reflection, displaying, & doing. Jossey-Bass, a Wiley Imprint. San Francisco, Ca. 3-7.
Bonk, C. & Zhang, K. (2006). Introducing the R2D2 model: Online learning for the diverse learners of this world. Distance Education. 27(2) 258.
Brown, J. (2007). Learning, working & playing in the digital age. 1999 Conference of American Association for Higher Education. 1-6.
Johnson, G. (2006). Synchronous and asynchronous text-based CMC in educational contexts: A review of recent research. Techtrends.50(4), 46-51.
Jong, T. & Joolingen, W. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Education Research. 68, 1-3.
Koschmann, T., Hall, R., & Miyake, N. (2002), Carrying forward the conversation: CSCL2. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Mahwah, New Jersey. 259-262.
Oshima, J. & Oshima, R. (2002). Coordination of Asynchronous and synchronous communication: Coordination of asynchronous and synchronous communication: Differences in qualities of knowledge advancement discourse between experts and novices. In T. Koschmann, R. Hall & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL 2: Carrying Forward the Conversation. (pp. 55-77). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Reil, M. & Polin, L. (2004). Common ground and critical differences in designing technical environments. In S. Barab R., Kling & J. Gray (Eds.) (pp.16-22).
Thursday, March 5, 2009
3-D Technologies
Technologies can support and create online social environments by:
1. Interfacing learning environments- the student and instructor can communicate via contextual 3-D formats
2. Creating an environment that allows learning to be informal and formal depending on topic
3. Bringing the instructor and student to the forefront of interactions
4. Promoting learners to be active in the learning process
5. Providing a scaffolding affect with apprenticeship opportunities
6. Allowing for realism in special effects that creates interest and connection for the student learner.
Theoretical Rationales:
1. Education consists of interactions with others that are both, psychological and sociological (Dewey 1897).
2. Maturation of the learner occurs in steps-from a social concept progressing to individual scholarship. (Vygotsky 1978).
3. Learning is natural social process (Premack 1984)
4. Learners are active and not passive in a 3-D on-line discourse (Bredo 1994),
5. Scaffolding for the learner is accomplished by constructivist learning environments, such as those created by a 3-D on-line format (Bruner 1961, 1997).
6. New knowledge promotes new interests and thus promotes the addition of innovative understanding by the learner (Jones, 2003).
Parts of these theories have been in use for quite some time to enhance the need for supported outcome measures in web based learning and avenues of invention that require a theoretical basis. Research has proven efficacy concerning how individuals learn and is the base for educational models when the material is authentic. Too often new technologies promote their goods without the theory base required and are devoid of an effective learning environment, causing a pseudo sense of learning.
Simulations of Conceptual Domains
The article by Jong and Joolingen discuss Scientific Discovery Learning simulation and associated problems with on-line educational knowledge (per review of original studies). The basis of this type of learning stems from De Jong and Njoo and consists of the definition of the scientific problem, a hypothesis statement, experimental design, data collection, application, and predictors. The specific problems the authors cited are:
Incorrect hypothesis statements can skew result of the research by student learners
Inaccurate interpretations of data (whether from incorrectly written hypothesis or inadequate knowledge of graphing, both present interpretation problems)
Students who were disorganized and practiced in a random order were less successful and had poorer outcomes
Less success if student has no prior knowledge of educational material
Combining the simulation material with support from instructors is discussed by Jong and Joolingen to assist the promotion of simulated education. The heuristic design suggestions offered by the authors include:
Supportive knowledge on the web site to encourage the memory of prior information
Scaffold information pertinent to current studied only and introduce new studies as course progresses
Creating a hypothesis menu, recommend predefined hypothesis, or offer hypothesis complete with variables, verbs to change if needed, and connectors. Also providing tools for data analysis and graphing designs with training.
Monitoring research planning and order approach, (I.E. use of a tool similar to QUEST for assistance to work through problems) that have some control over the variables.
Supporting and monitoring the student’s progress via journaling with expert collaboration to focus the student’s goals.
Giving the student a step by step method (per simulation) to complete an experiment or providing a preset sequence that allows student participation may improve success.( although the Smithtown exercise proved otherwise-sequential methods do not work as well).
Overall, scientific achievement via on-line simulations, alone, was less effective than those with synchronous instruction. Other methods for a more complete success are provided as:
Providing concurrent information as the experiment progresses
Induction of questions, games, and exercises that correlate with the assignment
Scaffolding educational materials to meet the needs of the study
Simulation does not equate to learning as the student needs initiative with implicit application for better success. All in all, the induction of supportive tools pertaining to the educational materials simulated, can prove a better outcome for the student learner and provide a richer learning environment.
1. Interfacing learning environments- the student and instructor can communicate via contextual 3-D formats
2. Creating an environment that allows learning to be informal and formal depending on topic
3. Bringing the instructor and student to the forefront of interactions
4. Promoting learners to be active in the learning process
5. Providing a scaffolding affect with apprenticeship opportunities
6. Allowing for realism in special effects that creates interest and connection for the student learner.
Theoretical Rationales:
1. Education consists of interactions with others that are both, psychological and sociological (Dewey 1897).
2. Maturation of the learner occurs in steps-from a social concept progressing to individual scholarship. (Vygotsky 1978).
3. Learning is natural social process (Premack 1984)
4. Learners are active and not passive in a 3-D on-line discourse (Bredo 1994),
5. Scaffolding for the learner is accomplished by constructivist learning environments, such as those created by a 3-D on-line format (Bruner 1961, 1997).
6. New knowledge promotes new interests and thus promotes the addition of innovative understanding by the learner (Jones, 2003).
Parts of these theories have been in use for quite some time to enhance the need for supported outcome measures in web based learning and avenues of invention that require a theoretical basis. Research has proven efficacy concerning how individuals learn and is the base for educational models when the material is authentic. Too often new technologies promote their goods without the theory base required and are devoid of an effective learning environment, causing a pseudo sense of learning.
Simulations of Conceptual Domains
The article by Jong and Joolingen discuss Scientific Discovery Learning simulation and associated problems with on-line educational knowledge (per review of original studies). The basis of this type of learning stems from De Jong and Njoo and consists of the definition of the scientific problem, a hypothesis statement, experimental design, data collection, application, and predictors. The specific problems the authors cited are:
Incorrect hypothesis statements can skew result of the research by student learners
Inaccurate interpretations of data (whether from incorrectly written hypothesis or inadequate knowledge of graphing, both present interpretation problems)
Students who were disorganized and practiced in a random order were less successful and had poorer outcomes
Less success if student has no prior knowledge of educational material
Combining the simulation material with support from instructors is discussed by Jong and Joolingen to assist the promotion of simulated education. The heuristic design suggestions offered by the authors include:
Supportive knowledge on the web site to encourage the memory of prior information
Scaffold information pertinent to current studied only and introduce new studies as course progresses
Creating a hypothesis menu, recommend predefined hypothesis, or offer hypothesis complete with variables, verbs to change if needed, and connectors. Also providing tools for data analysis and graphing designs with training.
Monitoring research planning and order approach, (I.E. use of a tool similar to QUEST for assistance to work through problems) that have some control over the variables.
Supporting and monitoring the student’s progress via journaling with expert collaboration to focus the student’s goals.
Giving the student a step by step method (per simulation) to complete an experiment or providing a preset sequence that allows student participation may improve success.( although the Smithtown exercise proved otherwise-sequential methods do not work as well).
Overall, scientific achievement via on-line simulations, alone, was less effective than those with synchronous instruction. Other methods for a more complete success are provided as:
Providing concurrent information as the experiment progresses
Induction of questions, games, and exercises that correlate with the assignment
Scaffolding educational materials to meet the needs of the study
Simulation does not equate to learning as the student needs initiative with implicit application for better success. All in all, the induction of supportive tools pertaining to the educational materials simulated, can prove a better outcome for the student learner and provide a richer learning environment.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Reflective Study
Since the early 1990’s, according to Shumar and Renninger (2002), change has evolved and the definition of community from a social standard to one of essential commonality through interests has evolved into physical and virtual interactions in the form of virtual communities. Enduring face to face interactions has inhibited the broad spectrum of durability and flexibility of communications, while the Web provides the scaffolding for a more diverse group to support and grow as knowledge based communities without the inhibitions of traditional kith and kin. (Shumar & Renninger, 2002).
Ideal Virtual Learning Community
• Context: I would like to instill an on-line community for nursing students in order to enhance the learning environment and compliment the current system of classroom instruction. Traditional textbooks will remain the basic resource for student learning and guidance, while an on-line virtual community, corresponding to theory, will further enlighten critical thinking patterns. Curriculum will consist of case study materials and various researched items obtained via the internet and or current course materials. Students will have access to computers within the nursing lab if needed or have the option of using a home computer at their leisure.
• Subject matter: This knowledge based environment will enhance collective knowledge and according to Reil & Polin (2004) provide support to individual participants. Subjects will include older adult wellness, maternal and newborn nursing care, pediatric nursing, and basic medical surgical nursing, as designed for the first year nursing student.
• Target audience: First year associate degree nursing students enrolled in a Community College nursing program.
Planned strategies
• Needs: Facilitator, asynchronous tools such as ANGEL or DL2 with internet technology support, and computer accessibility. The key is to provide effective activities designed in sync with course curriculum requirements and syllabus objectives. According to John Seely Brown (2007), knowledge has two sides, the explicit which is the concept side and the action side; termed tacit knowledge. Tacit cognition develops between student and instructor as shared understanding slowly emerges.
• Goals: Students will be placed in discussion groups in order to work through critical thinking activities as a team. Activities will correspond to the subject content with reasonable due dates for postings. The team will be responsible for all materials in class and on the internet for testing purposes. The facilitator will allow the group to post, then guide the discussion forward for knowledge enhancement. Also, all terms and definitions can be posted on the site for easy reference, as this will enhance theory and increase student understanding of terminology for that particular class. The virtual community will also provide fun activities, such as hangman, word puzzles, and non-graded quizzes to assist students with class content.
• Purposes: Student’s tacit ability to comprehend theory content will be reinforced by synchronous studies. The virtual community can be set as a task-based learning environment, until facilitators become adept at using the Web design and students begin to accept this learning style. Implementing explicit type learning will be a future goal and provide interest throughout the first two semesters of nursing school.
• Interest: Students will log onto the site via a user I.D. and password, mimicking the current DL2 virtual learning site. They will be able to access the site from home or at the college opposite the days to in-class teaching for convenience. Reducing time spent in a designated class room environment may increase desirability of pursuing a nursing career for students who work, have children, or have obligations that interfere with time spent away from home. Distanced learners will benefit from virtual communities, simply from less travel expenses and less time away from family.
• Leadership: The instructor/facilitator will need to design curriculum corresponding to theory, decide due dates for all assignments, facilitate discussions, and collaborate with the students concerning critical thinking case studies. Time will be an issue until the design of the virtual community is completed and may be an issue that persists indefinitely as the community grows.
Framing
It is exciting to realize students can take responsibility for their own learning and current face-to-face pedagogy is not a technique set in stone. Change is not easy for those facilitators who argue that “conventional” practices have always worked and thus resist a break from the current assimilation-type model of teaching (Koschmann, Hall, &Miyake, 2002). Realizing metacognitive and active learning can be enhanced from either asynchronous or synchronous virtual community’s demands interest for any prudent instructor who has the student in mind. The Read, Reflect, Display, and Do (R2D2) model is described by, Bonk and Zhang (2008), as an educator’s tool to delineate age differences, learning preferences and cultural influences of the students making virtual learning an advantage for all. This design suggests provisions of reading materials for the auditory and verbal learners, reflective tasks for the observational learners, display for the visual learners and simulated activities for those tactile and kinesthetic learners (Bonk & Zhang, 2008). Reaching across all venues to stimulate the student’s desire to learn is worth venturing beyond the standard.
Upon, realizing that research has paved the path for virtual educational communities was an eye opener. Different teaching strategies described by Koschmann, Hall, & Miyake (2002) spurred thoughts about incorporating some type of virtual community opportunities within the two year college venue. Educational products, such as CSILE, ANGEL, or DL2, are key components for orientation to design, technical support, and security. Building virtual communities by Renninger & Shumar (2002) teaches us about success and failure, such as MediaMOO, and the spawning of virtual communities from those failures.
The study cited by Oshima & Oshima (2002) discusses the novice and expert learners in an asynchronous/synchronous virtual community environment. Skills for the novice learner lacked in discourse management, which led to a sense of stalled progression. It was clear that instructional support was needed to spur the students in research rebuttals and hypothesis statements. After reading the examples, I realized the two year student nurse would require more collaborative discourse with reflective writings in order to be successful. Perhaps, then, adding reflective studies to understand group concepts would be required for a more complete program.
A paradigm through discussions and blogs indicates success or failure of on-line virtual communities depends on:
Positive leadership skills
Integration of a facilitator
Desire of the institution to incorporate virtual learning on the premise of set goals
An organized structure such as scaffolding
Easy navigation through the site
Updating to meet cognitive levels and futuristic goals
Technological support
Lastly, consumer buy-in (Facilitators and College Administration)
Planting the seed at a recent faculty meeting made me realize virtual on-line communities are constantly on my mind. We use interactive television at the present which could serve as the backdrop for on-line pod casts in the future, relieving the instructor/student of set time limits for class. Other nursing programs are on-line, but may not meet the two year student need for instructor guidance. A balance seems to work well with the two year student between mediating on-line student discourse and classroom theory instruction. Any attempt of incorporating Web virtual communities will provide a richer and more advanced understanding of nursing concepts. I will be excited to introduce and develop a virtual community on the Web that will enhance, build, and grow our two year students into future critical thinkers that have the capacity to save lives.
References
Bonk, C. & Zhang K. (2008). The R2D2 model. In C. Bonk & K. Zhang. Empowering online learning. (pp. 3-5). Jossey-Bass, A wiley imprint. San Francisco, CA.
Brown, J. (2007). Learning, working & playing in the digital age. 1999 conference of American Association for Higher Education. (pp. 1-6).
Oshima, J. & Oshima, R. (2002). Coordination of Asynchronous and synchronous communication: Differences in qualities of knowledged advancement discourse between experts and novices. In T. Koschmann, R. Hall & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL 2: Carrying Forward the Conversation. (pp. 55-77). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Reil, M. & Polin, L. (2004). Common ground and critical differences in designing technical environments. In S. Barab R., Kling & J. Gray (Eds.) (pp.16-22).
Shumar, W. & Renninger, K. (2002). Introduction: On conceptualizing community. In K. Renninger & W. Shumar (Eds.) Building virtual communities: Learning and change in cyberspace (pp1-22). Cambridge University Press.
Ideal Virtual Learning Community
• Context: I would like to instill an on-line community for nursing students in order to enhance the learning environment and compliment the current system of classroom instruction. Traditional textbooks will remain the basic resource for student learning and guidance, while an on-line virtual community, corresponding to theory, will further enlighten critical thinking patterns. Curriculum will consist of case study materials and various researched items obtained via the internet and or current course materials. Students will have access to computers within the nursing lab if needed or have the option of using a home computer at their leisure.
• Subject matter: This knowledge based environment will enhance collective knowledge and according to Reil & Polin (2004) provide support to individual participants. Subjects will include older adult wellness, maternal and newborn nursing care, pediatric nursing, and basic medical surgical nursing, as designed for the first year nursing student.
• Target audience: First year associate degree nursing students enrolled in a Community College nursing program.
Planned strategies
• Needs: Facilitator, asynchronous tools such as ANGEL or DL2 with internet technology support, and computer accessibility. The key is to provide effective activities designed in sync with course curriculum requirements and syllabus objectives. According to John Seely Brown (2007), knowledge has two sides, the explicit which is the concept side and the action side; termed tacit knowledge. Tacit cognition develops between student and instructor as shared understanding slowly emerges.
• Goals: Students will be placed in discussion groups in order to work through critical thinking activities as a team. Activities will correspond to the subject content with reasonable due dates for postings. The team will be responsible for all materials in class and on the internet for testing purposes. The facilitator will allow the group to post, then guide the discussion forward for knowledge enhancement. Also, all terms and definitions can be posted on the site for easy reference, as this will enhance theory and increase student understanding of terminology for that particular class. The virtual community will also provide fun activities, such as hangman, word puzzles, and non-graded quizzes to assist students with class content.
• Purposes: Student’s tacit ability to comprehend theory content will be reinforced by synchronous studies. The virtual community can be set as a task-based learning environment, until facilitators become adept at using the Web design and students begin to accept this learning style. Implementing explicit type learning will be a future goal and provide interest throughout the first two semesters of nursing school.
• Interest: Students will log onto the site via a user I.D. and password, mimicking the current DL2 virtual learning site. They will be able to access the site from home or at the college opposite the days to in-class teaching for convenience. Reducing time spent in a designated class room environment may increase desirability of pursuing a nursing career for students who work, have children, or have obligations that interfere with time spent away from home. Distanced learners will benefit from virtual communities, simply from less travel expenses and less time away from family.
• Leadership: The instructor/facilitator will need to design curriculum corresponding to theory, decide due dates for all assignments, facilitate discussions, and collaborate with the students concerning critical thinking case studies. Time will be an issue until the design of the virtual community is completed and may be an issue that persists indefinitely as the community grows.
Framing
It is exciting to realize students can take responsibility for their own learning and current face-to-face pedagogy is not a technique set in stone. Change is not easy for those facilitators who argue that “conventional” practices have always worked and thus resist a break from the current assimilation-type model of teaching (Koschmann, Hall, &Miyake, 2002). Realizing metacognitive and active learning can be enhanced from either asynchronous or synchronous virtual community’s demands interest for any prudent instructor who has the student in mind. The Read, Reflect, Display, and Do (R2D2) model is described by, Bonk and Zhang (2008), as an educator’s tool to delineate age differences, learning preferences and cultural influences of the students making virtual learning an advantage for all. This design suggests provisions of reading materials for the auditory and verbal learners, reflective tasks for the observational learners, display for the visual learners and simulated activities for those tactile and kinesthetic learners (Bonk & Zhang, 2008). Reaching across all venues to stimulate the student’s desire to learn is worth venturing beyond the standard.
Upon, realizing that research has paved the path for virtual educational communities was an eye opener. Different teaching strategies described by Koschmann, Hall, & Miyake (2002) spurred thoughts about incorporating some type of virtual community opportunities within the two year college venue. Educational products, such as CSILE, ANGEL, or DL2, are key components for orientation to design, technical support, and security. Building virtual communities by Renninger & Shumar (2002) teaches us about success and failure, such as MediaMOO, and the spawning of virtual communities from those failures.
The study cited by Oshima & Oshima (2002) discusses the novice and expert learners in an asynchronous/synchronous virtual community environment. Skills for the novice learner lacked in discourse management, which led to a sense of stalled progression. It was clear that instructional support was needed to spur the students in research rebuttals and hypothesis statements. After reading the examples, I realized the two year student nurse would require more collaborative discourse with reflective writings in order to be successful. Perhaps, then, adding reflective studies to understand group concepts would be required for a more complete program.
A paradigm through discussions and blogs indicates success or failure of on-line virtual communities depends on:
Positive leadership skills
Integration of a facilitator
Desire of the institution to incorporate virtual learning on the premise of set goals
An organized structure such as scaffolding
Easy navigation through the site
Updating to meet cognitive levels and futuristic goals
Technological support
Lastly, consumer buy-in (Facilitators and College Administration)
Planting the seed at a recent faculty meeting made me realize virtual on-line communities are constantly on my mind. We use interactive television at the present which could serve as the backdrop for on-line pod casts in the future, relieving the instructor/student of set time limits for class. Other nursing programs are on-line, but may not meet the two year student need for instructor guidance. A balance seems to work well with the two year student between mediating on-line student discourse and classroom theory instruction. Any attempt of incorporating Web virtual communities will provide a richer and more advanced understanding of nursing concepts. I will be excited to introduce and develop a virtual community on the Web that will enhance, build, and grow our two year students into future critical thinkers that have the capacity to save lives.
References
Bonk, C. & Zhang K. (2008). The R2D2 model. In C. Bonk & K. Zhang. Empowering online learning. (pp. 3-5). Jossey-Bass, A wiley imprint. San Francisco, CA.
Brown, J. (2007). Learning, working & playing in the digital age. 1999 conference of American Association for Higher Education. (pp. 1-6).
Oshima, J. & Oshima, R. (2002). Coordination of Asynchronous and synchronous communication: Differences in qualities of knowledged advancement discourse between experts and novices. In T. Koschmann, R. Hall & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL 2: Carrying Forward the Conversation. (pp. 55-77). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Reil, M. & Polin, L. (2004). Common ground and critical differences in designing technical environments. In S. Barab R., Kling & J. Gray (Eds.) (pp.16-22).
Shumar, W. & Renninger, K. (2002). Introduction: On conceptualizing community. In K. Renninger & W. Shumar (Eds.) Building virtual communities: Learning and change in cyberspace (pp1-22). Cambridge University Press.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Case Study 1
Visual sustenance intrigues the students and gives peer reference for a variety of subjects ranging from examples of anorexia to samples of assimilation such as Dances with Wolves. The students often comment on the correlation between theory and visual examples as great effects; this week, in fact, we discussed blended or reconstituted families and played the Brady Bunch Song from You Tube for visual reference. Friday, the students, were reviewing sample tests and came upon the term; blended families and began to sing the Brady Bunch Song! Simple as it seems, our recall is sometimes based on repertoires of meaningless materials.
Wikipedia sparked some interest and indeed needed to be investigated. The site seemed innocent and full of information at the fingertips, never thinking to pursue validity. Ethics discounted the site for reference and subtracted points for its use. The forbidden site captured our attention as the question came to mind, “What was wrong with Wikipedia?”This paper will review some of the sites positives and negatives concerning both, Wikipedia and You Tube as the communities will be reviewed for validity and usability, as well as, goals and specific salient design features. Previous to investigating both sites, I was both, a lurker and user, since neither site demanded membership or asked specific questions, appropriate animosity, both sites were user friendly and give quick results, no matter what the content. You Tube provided visual results on any subject, while Wikipedia supplied knowledge for all topic matter. Quick and easy, without frustration or annoying membership, the sites offered materials pertinent to any research materials. Wikipedia offers a knowledge-based community, with the focus on the production of knowledge, forms of validation, and ways of propagation. Exception to the scholarly knowledge disseminated to the public comes in the form of reviewed materials by experts and common lay persons. The restrictions to submit materials for publishing are per policy, but admit that editing can be accomplished by simple board vote from established members. You Tube, on the other hand, is a practiced base learning community with an emphasis variety of both, expertise and experience. It flourishes with commitment to shared interests such as virtuosity or remediation. Roles are individualized and categorized by “You Tube” staff as participants assists to shape the knowledge base for a variety of subjects. The members, who contribute function as community conduits to dissuade cult practices in order to provide fluidity.
Purpose of Wikipedia relates to a communal effort to provide on-line information base imitating the encyclopedia. The goal emits from a “community project type” atmosphere that submits peer reviewed information based on research. Their web site features web servers that reach across the globe to inform ordinary people of encyclopedic type wonders. Anyone can be an editor if the peer approval is obtained and subject material is valid. You Tube is open for all and serves a menagerie of purpose as individuals strive for stardom. The initiator of the web site sought out for enjoyment and imagination via video submissions to begin his design in 2006. In retrospect, the site that was started for pleasure ended in a sale to for multi-millions, so much for fun!
Wikipedia proposes a structure that enforces a social system of communal standards for their editors, along with, conduct policies to ensure high levels of experience. Several hundred editors on a rotating basis carry out surveillance to observe for problematic entries. Extracting any subject published by the community is obtainable via Google search. Information is formatted to replicate encyclopedia materials and is easy to read, often accompanied by pictures or graphs. There are various technical sites, such as http://www.Wikipedia:FAQ/Technical , for information concerning software and supporting hardware. Structures of You Tube vary; input is straightforward and injected to provide user friendly information on video submission. Website is accessible by either http://www.youtube.com/ or via a search engine, such as Google or Yahoo. Topics for “lurkers” can be ascertained by simple search boxes on the site or by clicking on a favorite video viewable on the home page. For those interested in publishing videos a page is provided for downloading materials for review. Submitted videos are subject to community review and obscene subject matter. Viewing movies on You Tube requires membership to the community and is subject to age criteria, depending on movie ratings. Communication for both sites is in the form of submissions, viewing, or reviewing. No community forum is offered and discussion is limited to the community in control of the sites, themselves. Learning tools for both sites is in the eye of the beholder, for You Tube, entertainment may be the cause for curiosity, while Wikipedia may provide the user with information on a given subject. Interaction comes with the search for invigorating material and becomes a one sided biased application for desired content. To extract information based on non scholarly works can distract the learner, but can also induce an interest in the nature of basic humanity. In viewing and using both sites, I have learned to evaluate the knowledge base and become more wary of their usability. You Tube can be fun, entertaining, and habit forming! Feature of the week, or the most viewed videos beckon attention and may be precursors for full membership! Wikipedia, on the other hand, vies for caution and reference validity. I have used both in the past and have enjoyed the “stand up comedian” and “jingles of old shows” on You Tube. In retrospect, Wikipedia has been a favorite site for quick reference, particularly for my daughter, who is a current High School student. One does what one has to in the face of time limits!
I support those who can feature themselves on video for world viewing, but cannot support Wikipedia’s efforts to allow all users to submit or edit “research type “ materials and profess them as substantial adage. Both sights feature accessibility and easy user ability and are sustained by continual outreach for new materials. The prospect to become an editor or rise to stardom entices learners from all venues and subscribes a base for continued interest, thus bringing pseudo fame to both websites. In conclusion, researching these sites was enjoyable and insightful. Implications for continual use during theory class are subject to scrutiny, as awareness always projects fear of reliability. Wikipedia’s standards are worrisome as users continually vie for quick, easy reference material. Now if you will excuse me, I think I will join You Tube, movie offers are very enticing!
Tapped in is a virtual community of professional educators to interact, stay connected with other professional peers and colleagues, and enhance professional development of classroom erudition. I decided to investigate this particular community to glean formidable information for future web design or enhance possibilities for the college instructor. Tapped In became a site of interest simply for the friendliness and usability of the virtual community. A salutation from site facilitators always augments interest and gives some individuality to a virtual unknown entity. I initially signed in as a visitor and was greeted by the site mentor with an offer of serving me in any capacity possible. Another member, who had been conversing with the facilitator, stopped and issued a, “Hi! Kathy, “and then continued her conversation. Both interactions made me smile, feel warm, and spurred my curiosity. I was not alone.
My first option came in the form of a penguin, the site was all about the nature and living habitat of the penguin, all written by professional’s in collaboration with each other and peer reviewed. This sight featured pictures, teacher’s educational help, and information of the design and contributors, it was colorful, informative, easy to navigate, and useable. As a welcomed “lurker”, I navigated through the rooms, but was unable to view any of the current discussion groups or preview the evening’s advertised virtual conference without membership. The site offered information such as their history and goals with positive excitement for future members.
Tapped In, according to Riel and Polin, equates to a practice community. The community advertises the need for teachers to become more experienced professionals through learning and discussion groups, as well as, mentored teacher development. This community realizes that teachers need teachers and want to provide a venue that voids all boundaries. They, specifically, want the teachers to feel part of a community instead of alone, where they may feel frustrated and quit the venture. The shared values and teacher “language” serve a greater purpose than simply advancing the skill of the learner. Tapped In supports the vision to share strategies, resources, and professional support options, allowing the instructor to choose their particular interests. Task involvement includes offering a calendar of events for each month defining specific options of study or discussion, group creation and management, and customized virtual public buildings. Members have the opportunity to chat or use private messaging, along with, use of threaded discussion boards, and design of private rooms for their own use. Possibilities are endless for involved members and provide a source of support since research shows student achievement is directly linked to the quality of the teacher. Helpful links for technical support is provided through tutorials, e-mails, and chat rooms. The staff will advertise any upcoming events and promote provider activities, as well as, sponsor daily hosted events.
Structures of this community consist of virtual buildings where online activities take place. The “ground floor” consists of a reception area where the help desk and staff are located. Other public rooms are located on this floor that accommodates conferences. The second floor features group rooms that may be private or public, depending on the agenda. The group room “owners” will assign moderators for discussions and will give permission to attend. The third floor boasts personal offices for affiliated members to the organization. Interaction begins on the homepage for public viewing; discussions formulate to verify information, seek guidance, or give a friendly “Hello” to the facilitator or from the facilitator. Other communication stem from membership discussions held in various conference rooms or comment boxes on each page of the content areas. Online activities include facilitators to focus discussion groups and guide work group participation. Learning opportunities arise from scheduled events throughout the month, Penguins, of course, are listed for February. These types of activities give teachers room to expand knowledge and gain knowledge of how to introduce online assistance to the classroom. Support from colleagues is a key for truthful participation and an aggregate option for the future of learning. Participant membership is subject to a quick profile with the idea that professional teachers, who provide instruction to kindergarten through at least High School, will apply. These instructors have the opportunity to refine their profession by trying out new skills under a safe and supportive environment. They also have the occasion to lead discussion groups with an appropriate topic and mentor other educators. Gaining technical skills provide the greatest opportunity to advance in the “techno” environment and produce informative lessons via virtuosity. A few examples of what I have observed derived from researching the site and learning different opportunities open in any venue. It would be exciting to design a website for all nursing educators, to compare, contrast, attend symposiums/conferences, and chat together in a supportive milieu. Using “floors” to define the setting is a simple, unobtrusive plan that all can assimilate and understand. Perhaps an idea is evolving?
The sustainability of this community comes from interest and need. People need people and professionals need continual training to enhance cognitive skills. The opportunity to try out new ideas is invigorating for the learning process as others gain its value. Facilitators and mentors provide that extra entity that some may view as a needed component in order to keep focus and not waste precious time. Planned discussions and learning opportunities provide variances of interest and keep the professional attracted. The salient design features that include participation assist with ownership and provide continued attendance.
Technological tools are arranged by staff services, where consistent help avenues are available. Online tutorials and orientation assist the new member with navigation assistance, while e-mail services can offer direct supervision for online difficulties. The site features data collection and training ventures for those interested in superior learning. All available resources assist the learning community by providing topics of interest for the educator. Opportunities to incorporate new materials into the classroom increases community awareness and virtual student learning “and can be the ingredient for success. The website design features may reinvent the way teachers prepare for classroom teaching. Perhaps the “factory type” school rooms will be a thing of the past as learning organizations emerge in their place. Seeds are planted as the virtual community grows and more teachers utilize 21st century learning organizations. Who knows the future student may sit at a table and enjoy breakfast and lunch in the privacy of their own home! The idea of collaborating knowledge and skills will empower teachers, as well as students, and finally rise above the old adage “it’s always been done that way.” A story that I heard from a fellow colleague emphasized this concept. A woman was asked why she always cooked the turkey breast side up, she thought about the wisdom her mom had and relayed the comment, “Because my mother taught me how to cook a turkey and this is how you do it.” Years went by and this woman finally remembered the question and asked her mother, “Why do you really cook the turkey breast side up?” “Well,” the mother replied, “That’s the only way it would fit in the pan.”
Wikipedia sparked some interest and indeed needed to be investigated. The site seemed innocent and full of information at the fingertips, never thinking to pursue validity. Ethics discounted the site for reference and subtracted points for its use. The forbidden site captured our attention as the question came to mind, “What was wrong with Wikipedia?”This paper will review some of the sites positives and negatives concerning both, Wikipedia and You Tube as the communities will be reviewed for validity and usability, as well as, goals and specific salient design features. Previous to investigating both sites, I was both, a lurker and user, since neither site demanded membership or asked specific questions, appropriate animosity, both sites were user friendly and give quick results, no matter what the content. You Tube provided visual results on any subject, while Wikipedia supplied knowledge for all topic matter. Quick and easy, without frustration or annoying membership, the sites offered materials pertinent to any research materials. Wikipedia offers a knowledge-based community, with the focus on the production of knowledge, forms of validation, and ways of propagation. Exception to the scholarly knowledge disseminated to the public comes in the form of reviewed materials by experts and common lay persons. The restrictions to submit materials for publishing are per policy, but admit that editing can be accomplished by simple board vote from established members. You Tube, on the other hand, is a practiced base learning community with an emphasis variety of both, expertise and experience. It flourishes with commitment to shared interests such as virtuosity or remediation. Roles are individualized and categorized by “You Tube” staff as participants assists to shape the knowledge base for a variety of subjects. The members, who contribute function as community conduits to dissuade cult practices in order to provide fluidity.
Purpose of Wikipedia relates to a communal effort to provide on-line information base imitating the encyclopedia. The goal emits from a “community project type” atmosphere that submits peer reviewed information based on research. Their web site features web servers that reach across the globe to inform ordinary people of encyclopedic type wonders. Anyone can be an editor if the peer approval is obtained and subject material is valid. You Tube is open for all and serves a menagerie of purpose as individuals strive for stardom. The initiator of the web site sought out for enjoyment and imagination via video submissions to begin his design in 2006. In retrospect, the site that was started for pleasure ended in a sale to for multi-millions, so much for fun!
Wikipedia proposes a structure that enforces a social system of communal standards for their editors, along with, conduct policies to ensure high levels of experience. Several hundred editors on a rotating basis carry out surveillance to observe for problematic entries. Extracting any subject published by the community is obtainable via Google search. Information is formatted to replicate encyclopedia materials and is easy to read, often accompanied by pictures or graphs. There are various technical sites, such as http://www.Wikipedia:FAQ/Technical , for information concerning software and supporting hardware. Structures of You Tube vary; input is straightforward and injected to provide user friendly information on video submission. Website is accessible by either http://www.youtube.com/ or via a search engine, such as Google or Yahoo. Topics for “lurkers” can be ascertained by simple search boxes on the site or by clicking on a favorite video viewable on the home page. For those interested in publishing videos a page is provided for downloading materials for review. Submitted videos are subject to community review and obscene subject matter. Viewing movies on You Tube requires membership to the community and is subject to age criteria, depending on movie ratings. Communication for both sites is in the form of submissions, viewing, or reviewing. No community forum is offered and discussion is limited to the community in control of the sites, themselves. Learning tools for both sites is in the eye of the beholder, for You Tube, entertainment may be the cause for curiosity, while Wikipedia may provide the user with information on a given subject. Interaction comes with the search for invigorating material and becomes a one sided biased application for desired content. To extract information based on non scholarly works can distract the learner, but can also induce an interest in the nature of basic humanity. In viewing and using both sites, I have learned to evaluate the knowledge base and become more wary of their usability. You Tube can be fun, entertaining, and habit forming! Feature of the week, or the most viewed videos beckon attention and may be precursors for full membership! Wikipedia, on the other hand, vies for caution and reference validity. I have used both in the past and have enjoyed the “stand up comedian” and “jingles of old shows” on You Tube. In retrospect, Wikipedia has been a favorite site for quick reference, particularly for my daughter, who is a current High School student. One does what one has to in the face of time limits!
I support those who can feature themselves on video for world viewing, but cannot support Wikipedia’s efforts to allow all users to submit or edit “research type “ materials and profess them as substantial adage. Both sights feature accessibility and easy user ability and are sustained by continual outreach for new materials. The prospect to become an editor or rise to stardom entices learners from all venues and subscribes a base for continued interest, thus bringing pseudo fame to both websites. In conclusion, researching these sites was enjoyable and insightful. Implications for continual use during theory class are subject to scrutiny, as awareness always projects fear of reliability. Wikipedia’s standards are worrisome as users continually vie for quick, easy reference material. Now if you will excuse me, I think I will join You Tube, movie offers are very enticing!
Tapped in is a virtual community of professional educators to interact, stay connected with other professional peers and colleagues, and enhance professional development of classroom erudition. I decided to investigate this particular community to glean formidable information for future web design or enhance possibilities for the college instructor. Tapped In became a site of interest simply for the friendliness and usability of the virtual community. A salutation from site facilitators always augments interest and gives some individuality to a virtual unknown entity. I initially signed in as a visitor and was greeted by the site mentor with an offer of serving me in any capacity possible. Another member, who had been conversing with the facilitator, stopped and issued a, “Hi! Kathy, “and then continued her conversation. Both interactions made me smile, feel warm, and spurred my curiosity. I was not alone.
My first option came in the form of a penguin, the site was all about the nature and living habitat of the penguin, all written by professional’s in collaboration with each other and peer reviewed. This sight featured pictures, teacher’s educational help, and information of the design and contributors, it was colorful, informative, easy to navigate, and useable. As a welcomed “lurker”, I navigated through the rooms, but was unable to view any of the current discussion groups or preview the evening’s advertised virtual conference without membership. The site offered information such as their history and goals with positive excitement for future members.
Tapped In, according to Riel and Polin, equates to a practice community. The community advertises the need for teachers to become more experienced professionals through learning and discussion groups, as well as, mentored teacher development. This community realizes that teachers need teachers and want to provide a venue that voids all boundaries. They, specifically, want the teachers to feel part of a community instead of alone, where they may feel frustrated and quit the venture. The shared values and teacher “language” serve a greater purpose than simply advancing the skill of the learner. Tapped In supports the vision to share strategies, resources, and professional support options, allowing the instructor to choose their particular interests. Task involvement includes offering a calendar of events for each month defining specific options of study or discussion, group creation and management, and customized virtual public buildings. Members have the opportunity to chat or use private messaging, along with, use of threaded discussion boards, and design of private rooms for their own use. Possibilities are endless for involved members and provide a source of support since research shows student achievement is directly linked to the quality of the teacher. Helpful links for technical support is provided through tutorials, e-mails, and chat rooms. The staff will advertise any upcoming events and promote provider activities, as well as, sponsor daily hosted events.
Structures of this community consist of virtual buildings where online activities take place. The “ground floor” consists of a reception area where the help desk and staff are located. Other public rooms are located on this floor that accommodates conferences. The second floor features group rooms that may be private or public, depending on the agenda. The group room “owners” will assign moderators for discussions and will give permission to attend. The third floor boasts personal offices for affiliated members to the organization. Interaction begins on the homepage for public viewing; discussions formulate to verify information, seek guidance, or give a friendly “Hello” to the facilitator or from the facilitator. Other communication stem from membership discussions held in various conference rooms or comment boxes on each page of the content areas. Online activities include facilitators to focus discussion groups and guide work group participation. Learning opportunities arise from scheduled events throughout the month, Penguins, of course, are listed for February. These types of activities give teachers room to expand knowledge and gain knowledge of how to introduce online assistance to the classroom. Support from colleagues is a key for truthful participation and an aggregate option for the future of learning. Participant membership is subject to a quick profile with the idea that professional teachers, who provide instruction to kindergarten through at least High School, will apply. These instructors have the opportunity to refine their profession by trying out new skills under a safe and supportive environment. They also have the occasion to lead discussion groups with an appropriate topic and mentor other educators. Gaining technical skills provide the greatest opportunity to advance in the “techno” environment and produce informative lessons via virtuosity. A few examples of what I have observed derived from researching the site and learning different opportunities open in any venue. It would be exciting to design a website for all nursing educators, to compare, contrast, attend symposiums/conferences, and chat together in a supportive milieu. Using “floors” to define the setting is a simple, unobtrusive plan that all can assimilate and understand. Perhaps an idea is evolving?
The sustainability of this community comes from interest and need. People need people and professionals need continual training to enhance cognitive skills. The opportunity to try out new ideas is invigorating for the learning process as others gain its value. Facilitators and mentors provide that extra entity that some may view as a needed component in order to keep focus and not waste precious time. Planned discussions and learning opportunities provide variances of interest and keep the professional attracted. The salient design features that include participation assist with ownership and provide continued attendance.
Technological tools are arranged by staff services, where consistent help avenues are available. Online tutorials and orientation assist the new member with navigation assistance, while e-mail services can offer direct supervision for online difficulties. The site features data collection and training ventures for those interested in superior learning. All available resources assist the learning community by providing topics of interest for the educator. Opportunities to incorporate new materials into the classroom increases community awareness and virtual student learning “and can be the ingredient for success. The website design features may reinvent the way teachers prepare for classroom teaching. Perhaps the “factory type” school rooms will be a thing of the past as learning organizations emerge in their place. Seeds are planted as the virtual community grows and more teachers utilize 21st century learning organizations. Who knows the future student may sit at a table and enjoy breakfast and lunch in the privacy of their own home! The idea of collaborating knowledge and skills will empower teachers, as well as students, and finally rise above the old adage “it’s always been done that way.” A story that I heard from a fellow colleague emphasized this concept. A woman was asked why she always cooked the turkey breast side up, she thought about the wisdom her mom had and relayed the comment, “Because my mother taught me how to cook a turkey and this is how you do it.” Years went by and this woman finally remembered the question and asked her mother, “Why do you really cook the turkey breast side up?” “Well,” the mother replied, “That’s the only way it would fit in the pan.”
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Reflections
As I think about the content genre of virtual cyberspace, the word detraditionalization, (Giddens, 1994) comes to mind as a correct all encompassing term. Information sought and acquired through means of communication with others expands the "old method" of being fed through one-sided communication, such as a physician to a patient. Extracting correct information is key to managing your footsteps in the muck and mire of those who advise without credential. For instance, my family trudged through cyberspace technology to acquire the desired information on a new procedure, advertised as breakthrough medicine for lung cancer and described as ablative extraction of inoperable tumors, in order to sustain hope. Each member displayed obvious disturbing differences on the information content and outcome measures, relaying almost opposite views on the same article! How bizarre! Could it be said that information is only as reliable as the understanding of the learner? Or are we like sheep, who follow the leader into a ravine to our death?
I have to smile satirically at the MMR debate. Just recently I delivered the theory class on preventable diseases through vaccinations and instructed the class to promote the "real affects/effects of vaccine benefits. Certainly, anyone with know how would research the subject and correlate valid sustenance and discard misguided data. Not so! The gospel truth is told by personal experience with flair. Cuddos to the Centers for Disease Control who issued "evidenced based" rebuttals for the continuation of vaccinations and supported the need to continue immunizations for the sake of humanity!
With all this in mind, our virtual "self help" society should continue to seek resources within the website itself, and urge the site to formulate user friendly, informitive guidance, instead of anxiety producing data from excessive information. Our society is at risk due to swift changes in thought and emotion-guidance is key to truly manage all information, afterall, visiting space was just an idea at one time until some, such as Neil Armstrong and John Glenn, accepted the challenge and walked on the moon. Nothing is impossible-refinement of cyberspace is at hand.
The steps offered in chapter 10 for building a virtual communities are thought provoking. It will assist in focusing the goals and providing a template for our key project, as well as, helping those involved to understand their roles. It will provide an enhanced educational background for the learning process, while intergrating a new concept in the learning cycle that was privy to face to face interjections in the past. Following the stages from idea to wrap-up will keep the project on task, while providing key examples for insight. Good idea!
Silly as it seems, John Seely Brown's article, "Learning, Working & Playing in the Digital Age," captured my thoughts exactly. Brown discusses the generation gap between the techno children of today compared to those advanced in age, who use a manual for technology, as profoundly different. Children never resort to manuals and just "figure it out" by trail and error. So what are we afraid of? Internet fires? Brown discusses how the net can solve some of the problems from past knowledge infirmities that inhibited a fluid base of learning. He provides support for the experts to share knowledge and mentor those seeking information and skill, much like this internet course, and describes the information data base as endless. The net, as Brown relates, has portability and can produce virtual communities where ever you live allowing for boundless relationships whether small town or big city. So, even those with age factors can, in fact, learn to conquer fear of the unknown and join those techno capable children in a virtual world of possibilites, perhaps bridging the societal age gap.
I have to smile satirically at the MMR debate. Just recently I delivered the theory class on preventable diseases through vaccinations and instructed the class to promote the "real affects/effects of vaccine benefits. Certainly, anyone with know how would research the subject and correlate valid sustenance and discard misguided data. Not so! The gospel truth is told by personal experience with flair. Cuddos to the Centers for Disease Control who issued "evidenced based" rebuttals for the continuation of vaccinations and supported the need to continue immunizations for the sake of humanity!
With all this in mind, our virtual "self help" society should continue to seek resources within the website itself, and urge the site to formulate user friendly, informitive guidance, instead of anxiety producing data from excessive information. Our society is at risk due to swift changes in thought and emotion-guidance is key to truly manage all information, afterall, visiting space was just an idea at one time until some, such as Neil Armstrong and John Glenn, accepted the challenge and walked on the moon. Nothing is impossible-refinement of cyberspace is at hand.
The steps offered in chapter 10 for building a virtual communities are thought provoking. It will assist in focusing the goals and providing a template for our key project, as well as, helping those involved to understand their roles. It will provide an enhanced educational background for the learning process, while intergrating a new concept in the learning cycle that was privy to face to face interjections in the past. Following the stages from idea to wrap-up will keep the project on task, while providing key examples for insight. Good idea!
Silly as it seems, John Seely Brown's article, "Learning, Working & Playing in the Digital Age," captured my thoughts exactly. Brown discusses the generation gap between the techno children of today compared to those advanced in age, who use a manual for technology, as profoundly different. Children never resort to manuals and just "figure it out" by trail and error. So what are we afraid of? Internet fires? Brown discusses how the net can solve some of the problems from past knowledge infirmities that inhibited a fluid base of learning. He provides support for the experts to share knowledge and mentor those seeking information and skill, much like this internet course, and describes the information data base as endless. The net, as Brown relates, has portability and can produce virtual communities where ever you live allowing for boundless relationships whether small town or big city. So, even those with age factors can, in fact, learn to conquer fear of the unknown and join those techno capable children in a virtual world of possibilites, perhaps bridging the societal age gap.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
