The initial idea was to use this site to explore global e-learning issues. This idea is still in place. I have been quite busy of late, but I have to explore this further. The roles of ICT is globalized. As indicated in my earlier blog, International Development organizations are promoting universal access to telecommunications as part of the initiatives. A lot has been done in Africa already, but there is more to do when it comes to infrastructure and software development. The emergence of open software is an area worthy of study. Hope to get back to this topic later.
Meanwhile, the ratio of person-to-computer is high, plus high cost of access, relative to other economically endowed places and global average. Based on partnerships between and across Africa, the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) is promoting an African-owned and Africa-led effort to accelerated economic growth. The ICT initiative project is a priority. Fast track programs are being implemented for ICT literacy fluency, benefit awareness and technology professional development. I can't wait to see how far the programs have advanced to meet its goals. Again the NEPAD initiative calls for further study to see how far the program is meeting the needs of its clients on the African continent, and in education. Will be back!
Jal
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
FIT Team Project
The FIT Team B is composed of four members who were assigned to facilitate twenty-two students in an IT course with the consent of the host instructor. We were to practice facilitation and e-moderating in real online context, write and present our reports F2F and as a term paper. Each guest facilitator was assigned to facilitate a team of two to three students who were required to choose a topic in emerging technologies for presentation, post questions and lead the class in a meaningful discourse. This project commenced from October 23, 2007 to November 19, 2007. The duration for each project was approximately two weeks, December 06, 2007.
The team’s experience as facilitators, e-moderators and observers in practice was presented to the class last week. Prior to the presentation, each member debriefed other group members about their own experiences. Together, we worked as a team to write edit and publish our presentations. Working together has been fruitful; so far we have had no problems. Our main means of communication were through emails and face-to-face meetings in class. There were few differences in our observations and expectations with the facilitation process, but they are all learning experiences. For example, I found members in my assigned group responsive; however, other guest facilitators felt differently. My major observation was that the students did not use most of the resources provided; hence, could not provide in depth knowledge about the topic – Social Networking Websites. I would suggest that students use the resources to expand their scope of knowledge.
As a group, we recommend the use of technology tools such as Skype and simple Homepage development in Bb to communicate – get connected, establish their social presence, and practice with some of these tools. Practice makes perfect. The importance of students to express their views online is extensively discussed by Price & Oliver (2007) and Salmon (2006). In addition, we suggest students provide technology resources, especially, those used in their presentations to others – to share and practice. The experience is worth the time, and I say KUDOS to all the group members.
JAL
The team’s experience as facilitators, e-moderators and observers in practice was presented to the class last week. Prior to the presentation, each member debriefed other group members about their own experiences. Together, we worked as a team to write edit and publish our presentations. Working together has been fruitful; so far we have had no problems. Our main means of communication were through emails and face-to-face meetings in class. There were few differences in our observations and expectations with the facilitation process, but they are all learning experiences. For example, I found members in my assigned group responsive; however, other guest facilitators felt differently. My major observation was that the students did not use most of the resources provided; hence, could not provide in depth knowledge about the topic – Social Networking Websites. I would suggest that students use the resources to expand their scope of knowledge.
As a group, we recommend the use of technology tools such as Skype and simple Homepage development in Bb to communicate – get connected, establish their social presence, and practice with some of these tools. Practice makes perfect. The importance of students to express their views online is extensively discussed by Price & Oliver (2007) and Salmon (2006). In addition, we suggest students provide technology resources, especially, those used in their presentations to others – to share and practice. The experience is worth the time, and I say KUDOS to all the group members.
JAL
Reflection - General 2
Now is the time to monitor students’ collaboration in computer-mediated collaborative problem-solving. How do functions such as tracking, motivation and emotional state play out in this situation? To analyze the effects of these factors, Zumbach, Reimann and Koch (2006) concluded from two empirical researches that feedback is advantageous on processes of group well-being, parameters of participation, collaboration, and interaction. Combining feedback approach for monitoring and fostering collaborative behavior with a design-based approach using distributed learning in the second study, the authors suggest that by distributing learning materials, collaborative behavior can be positively influenced. There was no significant effect on cognitive outcomes in both studies.
Online collaboration is important to keep focus and engage in meaningful discourse. Therefore, it is important that, facilitators provide guidelines and ask specific questions to elicit responses on particular topics. How often do we see learners drift off the main topic and drag the process endlessly, without making any meaningful contributions? According to Beaubin (1999), person-to-person interaction plays an important role in e-learning. The learner-learner interactions and team processes including team task, team development, peer relationships and communication media as regards the dynamics of online collaboration is expertly articulated by Zhang and Ge (2006). The dynamics of this learning environment is complex, involving intensive task definition, engagement, exploratory activities as well as identification of other relevant factors to move the process. However, constraints that may impact negatively on the process must be identified and addressed.
Inter-subjectivity defined simply as shared understanding that helps (facilitators) to relate one situation to another is a topic discussed by Bober and Dennen (2001). These authors focus on technological means to foster inter-subjectivity in knowledge construction graduate level courses and programs in online environment. I am most fascinated by Gilbert and Dabbagah (2005) on how to structure online discussion for meaningful discourse. This is one of my favorite articles. It is authentic and practical. They define meaningful discourse as the ability of learners to demonstrate critical thinking skills by relating course content to prior knowledge, interpreting content through the analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of others understanding, and making inferences. Relating this definition to the FIT project, I found the learners to be only engaged in relating the contents to their experiences. However, what was lacking was the critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. The process was too superficial with no deeper insight.
Tsu and Gory (2003) discuss asynchronous communication strategies in designs and management tactics. Methods suggested include discussion, case study, role plays, debates read and respond, and publishing. These are relevant learning methods, and through careful planning and management, will possibly contribute to improvement in the learning and facilitation processes. I will agree that online discussion is not only about posting and responding to questions and queries. Learners must be actively engaged in problem-solving through critical thinking, analysis and synthesis of the problem.
JAL
Online collaboration is important to keep focus and engage in meaningful discourse. Therefore, it is important that, facilitators provide guidelines and ask specific questions to elicit responses on particular topics. How often do we see learners drift off the main topic and drag the process endlessly, without making any meaningful contributions? According to Beaubin (1999), person-to-person interaction plays an important role in e-learning. The learner-learner interactions and team processes including team task, team development, peer relationships and communication media as regards the dynamics of online collaboration is expertly articulated by Zhang and Ge (2006). The dynamics of this learning environment is complex, involving intensive task definition, engagement, exploratory activities as well as identification of other relevant factors to move the process. However, constraints that may impact negatively on the process must be identified and addressed.
Inter-subjectivity defined simply as shared understanding that helps (facilitators) to relate one situation to another is a topic discussed by Bober and Dennen (2001). These authors focus on technological means to foster inter-subjectivity in knowledge construction graduate level courses and programs in online environment. I am most fascinated by Gilbert and Dabbagah (2005) on how to structure online discussion for meaningful discourse. This is one of my favorite articles. It is authentic and practical. They define meaningful discourse as the ability of learners to demonstrate critical thinking skills by relating course content to prior knowledge, interpreting content through the analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of others understanding, and making inferences. Relating this definition to the FIT project, I found the learners to be only engaged in relating the contents to their experiences. However, what was lacking was the critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. The process was too superficial with no deeper insight.
Tsu and Gory (2003) discuss asynchronous communication strategies in designs and management tactics. Methods suggested include discussion, case study, role plays, debates read and respond, and publishing. These are relevant learning methods, and through careful planning and management, will possibly contribute to improvement in the learning and facilitation processes. I will agree that online discussion is not only about posting and responding to questions and queries. Learners must be actively engaged in problem-solving through critical thinking, analysis and synthesis of the problem.
JAL
Sunday, December 9, 2007
Reflection - General 1
I have had lots of experience, actually for more than a decade with face-to-face teaching. I have a passion for teaching, and also to challenge myself with new ideas and innovations. I have had the chance to present seminars in International Development Projects working with Professors and personnel from institutions as the World Bank. It is all face-to-face with minimal technology. With the emergence of distance education and e-learning, the journey continues as more and more educational institutions are either shifting or engaging in blended learning – synchronous and asynchronous – call it what you will. International Development, one of my fields of practice, is shifting towards technology-based projects in presentations and application. Again, I have used both an open-source and commercial learning/course management systems to present instructions as part of my course of study; however, my expectation of this course was to explore and apply the tools necessary for online teaching in the real context.
The readings, class presentations, instructions and the FIT project has served the purpose. The 5-stage framework of e-tivities (Salmon, 2006) provides the model for teaching and learning on-line through on line networking. Practically, the process allow me to relate the reading to practice - with the FIT project, as I monitored closely from the beginning to present how students pass through the five stages of learning and interactivity. Again, the Australian Flexible Learning was a valuable tool for effective online facilitation. The scope and challenges were articulated. They were practical and effective.
Together with class presentations, FIT project, and concepts and case study of Motschnig-Pitrik and Holzinger (2002), I better understood that with learner-centered online instruction, learners can have the freedom to explore new areas of technology and media, based on their interests with assistance from the instructor. Since, there exist individual differences and learners may also have different preferences, the R2D2 Model by Bonk and Zhang (2006) provides a new model to address individual learning styles, motivation and preferences. Yes, this model is for the diverse learners of this world – Interesting!
What are the theories behind some of these practices? Read the article on “Two scaffolding: the dialectical process within the authenticity-generalizibility (A-G) continuum" for issues with compatibilities between traditional views of school-based learning and situated cognitive instructional approaches. The result of knowledge is a richer understanding of concepts, procedures and processes for transfer in the real world. What students learn in most part must be practiced. How do students evaluate their performances when they engage in team projects and dialogue online? Consider Leinonen and Jävelä’s (2006) article on facilitating interpersonal evaluation of knowledge in a context of distributed team collaboration. Wait a minute! This process was utilized by the instructors of IT 7130 and IT 6135. But how do students get to know how they have been evaluated by their peers? Were the assessments fair, with no biases? Think about it! It may be worth researching and discussing. What is my role as an instructor, facilitator, and e-moderator in all these? According to Maor (2003), the role of the teacher in developing interaction and reflection in an online community is to make learning interactive and collaborative. This application is most valuable to me as I aspire to engage in higher education blended learning. The metaphor of the four hats – pedagogical, social, managerial and technical action couldn’t have come at a better time. There is much to say, but hold on for now, till then.
Jal
The readings, class presentations, instructions and the FIT project has served the purpose. The 5-stage framework of e-tivities (Salmon, 2006) provides the model for teaching and learning on-line through on line networking. Practically, the process allow me to relate the reading to practice - with the FIT project, as I monitored closely from the beginning to present how students pass through the five stages of learning and interactivity. Again, the Australian Flexible Learning was a valuable tool for effective online facilitation. The scope and challenges were articulated. They were practical and effective.
Together with class presentations, FIT project, and concepts and case study of Motschnig-Pitrik and Holzinger (2002), I better understood that with learner-centered online instruction, learners can have the freedom to explore new areas of technology and media, based on their interests with assistance from the instructor. Since, there exist individual differences and learners may also have different preferences, the R2D2 Model by Bonk and Zhang (2006) provides a new model to address individual learning styles, motivation and preferences. Yes, this model is for the diverse learners of this world – Interesting!
What are the theories behind some of these practices? Read the article on “Two scaffolding: the dialectical process within the authenticity-generalizibility (A-G) continuum" for issues with compatibilities between traditional views of school-based learning and situated cognitive instructional approaches. The result of knowledge is a richer understanding of concepts, procedures and processes for transfer in the real world. What students learn in most part must be practiced. How do students evaluate their performances when they engage in team projects and dialogue online? Consider Leinonen and Jävelä’s (2006) article on facilitating interpersonal evaluation of knowledge in a context of distributed team collaboration. Wait a minute! This process was utilized by the instructors of IT 7130 and IT 6135. But how do students get to know how they have been evaluated by their peers? Were the assessments fair, with no biases? Think about it! It may be worth researching and discussing. What is my role as an instructor, facilitator, and e-moderator in all these? According to Maor (2003), the role of the teacher in developing interaction and reflection in an online community is to make learning interactive and collaborative. This application is most valuable to me as I aspire to engage in higher education blended learning. The metaphor of the four hats – pedagogical, social, managerial and technical action couldn’t have come at a better time. There is much to say, but hold on for now, till then.
Jal
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)