Mindtools

Originally when I heard the term "mindtools" I associated it with concept maps or schemas, like the kind you would create using webspiration. I didn't see how Excel could be considered a mindtool. Having read the Jonassen chapter on mindtools I realize that anything that forces you to reflect on and organize your thinking is a mindtool. Looking at it from that perspective, I can absolutely see how excel could be considered a mindtool in that you are forced to consider discrete pieces of information, how to categorize them, organize them, and how best to create visualizations with charts and graphs. I think a mindtool really has less to do with the tool itself and more to do with the crystallization of thinking.

Some other tools we've talked about, like flickr and delicious are really good researching tools. I have used flickr to get first person perspective on big events like Katrina and the Iranian election and subsequent protests. I have seen people use flickr's tagging capabilities, including museums and art history classes, to underscore important elements of a photo. In a photo taken during the Iranian election protests a photo taken of a woman in the protests tagged the cellphone that the woman was talking into, highlighting that the cell network had not yet been disabled at the time the photo was taken.

Besides the ability to do research by performing searches for pre-filtered results, the thing I find compelling about delicious is the folksonomy that you can see emerge. When I am researching a new area, it is helpful to me to see the tags that people have associated with the area. You can see the vocabulary that people use in association with the topic and how they've organized the hierarchy of information. That may not be an ideal means of knowledge creation, but I think it certainly is ideal in being able to quickly get an overall understanding of the landscape of a topic which enables you to conduct more pointed research.

I think what is most important about using these resources is the way they are used. I think it is most effective when these tools are used in the service of facilitating a larger initiative or project, not just tools for tools sake. When designing collaborative, knowledge constructing projects there are some things that I think are worth bearing in mind. The first is to consider what the tools afford. Some tools lend themselves to researching, others to collaboration and others as an information repository. Flickr and delicious are great for researching and sharing, but not for collaborating. In google docs and the now retired google wave, multiple people could be in the same document/environment working simultaneously and collaborating real time. Webspiration allows multiple users to work on the same piece of work, but only one at a time, which seems like asynchronous collaboration to me. One tool we haven't discussed is IM. I think there is potential for instant chat to be the thread of synchronous collaboration across even asynchronous tools.

Another consideration in using these tools has to do with account management. It becomes a bit overwhelming to have so many accounts with so many tools. I imagine that students over the course of time will have to manage not only a blog account, google account, flickr, delicious, wiki, and maybe even blackboard or ning accounts along with multiple email addresses - but also multiple accounts for most of those services for different grades, or even different subjects. We may end up needing another tool to keep track of all our accounts!

Week 11 - Looking for weaknesses

Based on Professor Lowes' comments from last week, I tried to keep an eye for weaknesses in the research articles I read this week.

In the Haavind article, she looked at the relationship of low instructor contribution to high collaborative events amongst students. The study started with seven high collaboration classes, but only three classes fit the model of being low in instructor posting and high collaboration events which was sustained through the course, so only those classes were researched.

This is a small data set to start with, and then to throw out four classes and only look at the remaining three is really small. It also seems like there would be value in trying to understand where the contradictions came from. Class 7 had extremely high instructor contribution *and* sustained high collaboration. Why?

In the Zucker report, he looked at the impact of two approaches to promoting student-student interaction and collaboration. An experiment group was told to assign double point value towards grade based on student to student interaction, and was compared to a control group with the normal point assignment.

In this study, after four weeks into the fifteen week class, the teachers hadn't doubled the points for student to student interaction. At that point when they were asked to do so, they did, but, I think the pattern had already been established at that point and it ruins the study.

Zucker also administered a survey and reported a very high student response rate of 82%. It made me wonder how the survey was presented. Who did the students think the survey was coming from - the school, the teacher, a researcher? Just curious. Also, a survey pet peeve of mine is not having "other" as an option, or better yet and open text field. Without one of those options, and by making every question mandatory, he effectively forced the survey takers to agree with him, leaving no room for a response that he didn't consider.

I also noticed that the Rice article references a Cavanaugh study - I thought it was the one we read last week, but no. The one from last week covered distance ed from 1999-2004. The study Rice references covered distance ed from 1980-1998. Really?! Did they look at correspondence classes? Wow.

Define success

My job is to take web usage data for our site and help business owners understand if their section of the site is "successful" and how to make it better. I see some similar patterns in the meta analysis we read this week.

At the end of the day success looks different from situation to situation depending on your objective, and if a group or a company or an industry can't agree on the same metrics and what they mean, then no one really knows what is being reported.

So, in education, what is our objective? We want kids to learn. But how do you measure how well a kid has learned?

I propose that it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to move forward with meaningful, actionable research until we think about this question. What does learning look like? Is it the ability to recall facts, can it be demonstrated in the ability to write an essay? And, to Alejandro's point, what about cheating? Once we identify what success looks like, then students efforts turn to striving to mimic that standard, not learning.

What if we were to accept that in this day and age, anything can be searched for and found, so what is the benefit of memorization. My kids are being taught cursive, and for the life of me I cannot imagine why.

It seems to me like the challenge is to be able to take existing information, sort out the good from the bad, synthesize it, and figure out how to use it appropriately. What if learning was measured by what was created and the process of creating it?

We would look at a student or students ability to pick a project, search for the resources they need to understand it at an appropriate level and take that information and apply it. We'd evaluate their success in collecting and gathering the requisite depth and breadth of information; the level to which they've understood and used the information appropriately; and how well they took the information to create something of their own.

It is unrealistic to think that anyone can learn all that they need for the rest of their life from their time in school. The benefit to this approach is that students learn how to find their answers and be critical thinkers, so whatever the question that arises in the future, they'll know the process to take to build their understanding.

Collaboration, All Star style

Nardy and Sean have already done a good job of talking about the logistics of our project and our workings, so I'll just give you some personal observations about the experience.

I think the hardest part of the process was at the beginning when we were trying to settle on the platform we were going to use to collaborate. We all did a lot of double posting and emailing to make sure the message got through to each other. It was a bit time consuming with the over communication and checking into multiple platforms. I don't remember how it is we finally went with the wave, I guess it just naturally evolved that way.

I liked using the wave. In the past I don't think you were able to get email notifications when changes were made to the wave, but they apparently changed that feature and that made life a lot easier. After a while when the wave got so long that it became clunky, Nardy and I discovered that you could delete pieces. Once we were all on the same page, we did a bit of pruning and that made it more manageable.

Nardy and I also communicated with Google chat a lot, which I found to be a huge plus. Whether I was at work in front of my laptop, or around town with my mobile, I got pinged and we could collaborate on resources or answer each others questions.

I found doing the researching for the content and picking the tools to be the most fun. I found trying to put the framework up around it all to be the most daunting, but Sean had a clear vision and he pulled it all together.

I love the benefits that come from working in a team, seeing things in a new light and how collectively you can do something better than you could have individually. We had a really good team, and I'm so happy with how it all turned out!

Taking a leap...

I don't know about everyone else, but I have found that when there is something that I am dreading, or have a lot of apprehension about, the best thing I can do is stop avoiding it and just jump in.

That's pretty much where I am at right now. I have never taught and have never put a lesson plan together. We've read so much about standards, curriculum, assessment, teaching styles, learning styles - the idea of building something that covers all of those areas seems totally overwhelming. But - I think that once I dive in and get into it, it won't be as overwhelming as I think. I also think this exercise will help me a lot, both in getting over the fear and in giving me a new perspective to consider when reading about online learning.

And, I'm really glad to be doing this with a team!

Week 6 - reassessing

Looking back at the schools I chose, I don't have different views of them now, but that is only because I was able to find so little information in the first place and haven't gotten any more. Perhaps I wish I had chosen different schools where I could have gotten more information, but it seems to be a general challenge, so maybe there wasn't must I could've done differently anyway.

Other views of mine have changed, however. While I believe wholeheartedly in online learning, I think that a blended model that includes both online and face to face holds a lot of potential. I think the ideal model of learning is that which is project based, and a blended style class would lend itself to working in a collaborative research project.

I had also imagined myself building an educational software platform, and while I still want to do that, I realize there are so many more options and I don't want to close myself off to just one. I think if my career were long enough and I had the opportunity, I would also want to spend time researching, and I'd also like to work as a coordinator or consultant to help teachers and school develop innovative ways to redesign their curriculum. And who knows - maybe I'll try teaching after all!

Week 5 - Emerging themes

Having spent a lot of time reading about online teaching this week, I've noticed some emerging trends. In past weeks we've read about online programs and funding for online programs. Several of those articles touched on the fact that there is a high level of scrutiny and accountability in online learning programs - more so than in the brick and mortars. Similarly, in reading about the standards and demands of online teachers, the same point was made. There are higher demands made, and requirements of online teachers.

This seems true across the board of teacher responsibilities. In terms of certification, both online teacher training and certification for each state they provide services to are required. Turn around times of both communication and feedback to submitted work is required to be much faster than f2f teachers. There is extra importance and challenge to building a community of learning, and keeping up with new technologies and learning how to use them effectively.

Interestingly, while teachers of online programs seem to be held to higher standards - or at least higher requirements - and face extra challenges, they are simultaneously being undermined as evidenced by a quote in Professor Lowes' article where a commercial course developer said they were under pressure to make courses "teacher proof."

I find this really sad. I became interested in this field because I know we can do a better job educating our kids and that technology affords us the opportunity to revisit the way we deliver education and bring to the next level. At the same time, while I know there are teachers out there who could do a better job, I also know there are a lot of really great teachers out there. I think the best teachers are the ones who are really invested in each individual student and helping to develop them into critical thinkers. One of my kids teachers said to my husband and me that her teaching style was to be short on explanations and long on time. Her approach is to sit with the student and help them think through their questions so they can arrive at their own answer, rather than just telling them the answer. That is something that technology can't replicate.

The idea that technology is being used to try to minimize the role teachers play is really disappointing and misses the point. In my view, the point of technology is to give students a dynamic platform in which to learn, where they can see things from a different perspective which might resonate for them - and to support and empower teachers to be able to take their skills even further. We need to work in partnership with teachers, not minimize their involvement with the practice of teaching.

Disenchantment

I was really looking forward to getting in there and kicking the tires on virtual learning. I didn't find a whole lot though, and what I did find wasn't all that impressive. I feel like this piece of it - seeing what is being done out there - is the heart of the matter vis a vis online learning. There are a number of sites that I contacted to get access to a demo, who never responded. Why the reluctance to share what they have? Are they afraid of their ideas being stolen by their competitor? Are they afraid of what the consumer will see they get for the price tag?

I wish we could do a comprehensive survey of the software and vendors that are out there providing online learning environments - whether alternative or extension. Maybe we could use the fact that we are studying online learning at Columbia Teacher College to get vendors to present to our class? I'd like to see more logistical, how it works information, and less marketing pitch.

Week 3

The readings this week reinforced some conceptions I had on charter schools. I thought a charter school would have more flexibility and it seems that that is true. It also seems that charters are under more scrutiny, which is detrimental to creating a new process or environment. I feel like we're in a place where we still don't know the full potential of what we could do, and it is an extraordinary challenge to simultaneously explore the potential, and put up guardrails around it in terms of funding policy, accountability and ownership. It would be such great research to have experimental programs that are free to think outside of the box and see what they come up with. We might learn some strategies to pick up from some and apply on a broader scale.

I had a conversation with Curt Fuchs last week. He is the coordinator of educational support services for the department of elementary and secondary education in Missouri. He has been overseeing their virtual school program. He had some really interesting information to share. I asked him about the funding cut that they recently suffered, and he said that while it's a challenge it has had its benefits too. At their height, they had 2,400 students enrolled in courses and while he didn't have a figure, he said the abondonment rate was significant. After the cuts, the new policy was that students who needed virtual education because of a fragile medical state could continue to take the classes and it would be paid for by the state, but other students who wanted to take classes would have to pay for it themselves, $300-$400 per class. He expected maybe 100 students to enroll. As it turns out they had over 300 students enroll and pay for their own classes - and their abandonment rate dropped significantly. A self selecting group of kids who take it seriously. Algebra is their biggest class for middle school students whose schools don't offer it. AP classes, foreign languages and physics also have high enrollment.

Another interesting thing he told me about was his difficulty in managing the providers. He had a number of horror stories. He said that generally speaking there is an overall lack of teacher student interaction. One provider (Kaplan) had a contract with the state that stipulated the student to teacher ratio was not to exceed 1:125, he discovered after the program was in place that the actual student teacher ratio was 1:400. He called them out on it, but they said it was the best they could do and it was common practice. He found one provider employing uncertified teachers which also violated their contract. Another provider had teachers who were only available via telephone office hours which were limited to 9 - 11pm. He had been getting feedback about one student having difficulty getting in touch with his teacher and Curt wanted to talk to the teacher about it. The provider, Apex, wouldn't give him the teachers' number. He said most of his job is spent making sure the providers are actually providing what they agreed to. He said his frustration is that these providers have huge lobbyists that have gotten legislation passed which limit his options, so legally he can only work with these big providers.

I asked him if he could establish the ideal system, what would he do. He said the only way to do it right is to hire your own teachers and develop your own course-ware.

Week 2 reflections

At the end of the Watson and Gemin article, Mickey Revenaugh VP for State Relations at Connections Academy says "Ensuring quality in a fast-growing enterprise like online learning is like upgrading the engine on a jetliner while it is in flight." This quote reminded me of the book Disrupting Class where Christenson talks about the front plane and back plane of innovation. He says that innovation happens where there is an unserved need.

This weeks readings about state run online programs underscored this reality for me. The Watson and Gemin article also mentions that online programs are often under more scrutiny than traditional classrooms. I started to wonder if in the private or charter schools we might see different methodology to online school if they are outside the state regulations and assessment obligations. Perhaps a for profit or charter online program has more room to innovate? I look forward to week 3 reading to find out.

I have also been thinking about assessment. What are other methods of measuring educational outcomes that fit with the types of skills students need to develop. How can you measure problem solving skills and critical thinking. I hope some of our future reading will focus on those issues.

Week 1 Reflection

There are a few things that stand out to me in looking back at the past week. The first has to do with the complexity in terminology. I didn't realize how extensive and detailed the vernacular is. I have decided that I am going to make myself a cheat sheet to keep it all straight! Given everything we've read and the discussions that we've had, I see how critical and challenging it is to be on the same page.

One topic that has come up a lot this week is communication both online and off, and the affordances and challenges of each. Last semester in Social Aspects of Internet Communication Technology we read a paper by Joseph Walther called Computer Mediated Communication. I had to go back and look at it again, my recollection was that there were many relevant points in the paper. One thing Walther discusses is that groups who had an expectation of long term relationships, like a long term group project, drove more personal, friendly relationships. I noticed that in the margins I wrote - consider this article when thinking about online learning and student/teacher relationships.

I read Christensens' book Disrupting Class last summer, and I liked it a lot. I found it inspiring. It's exciting to think that we're on the cusp of a new frontier in education. I realize, however, that what I imagined when I thought of this new future doesn't necessarily match what is taking root. I remember talking to a woman who ran the website division for a large marketing agency in Connecticut about five years ago. She said that back when tv was new to the market, it was essentially used to "do radio on the tv" and that what we were seeing is people "doing tv on the internet." I hope to see a future where we don't just perpetuate the way education has existed, but instead innovate and discover new approaches to learning and teaching.

There were some interesting projects I read about last semester in Cognition and Computers. One was a project called Archaeotype that Professors Black and McClintock researched at the Dalton School. It is a blended learning method where students working in groups learn about ancient Greece by digging up artifacts in a virtual dig. The students then research the artifacts both online in Archaeotype and in museums and had to form a hypothesis about the object. The group then presents their hypothesis to the rest of the class and had to defend their thinking. Another was River City where students worked collaboratively to solve the mystery of why people are dying in the town by conducting interviews, collecting samples and performing tests in an online lab. These projects are new, innovative approaches to education where students learn the subject matter and new skills, and are engaged in critical thinking and working collaboratively - all things they'll need to be able to do once they leave school.

I'm a staunch advocate of disruptive innovation and I'd love to see a game changer. I'd love even more to be a part of it!

About me

I am in the Instructional Technology and Media program, this is my second semester. I also work full time at Gartner, which is an IT research company in Connecticut. I am a web usage analyst, I help our business units evaluate and assess the effectiveness of our websites and make product development decisions based on usage metrics, usability studies and surveys. Previously I was a producer at Gartner and was responsible for working with the business owners, designers and developers to build new site sections and features.

My interests lie in taking my producer/web analytics/user experience skills and applying them to the development of educational software. I'm very passionate about the idea of developing new learning environments that give educational self determinism back to students to make them feel empowered. This class appealed to me because I wanted to get deep understanding of what software is being used in the marketplace today, how it is being used, and the benefits and shortcomings of each.

I have taken some online course, mainly training courses through Gartner, which have been fairly static. Watch a video, click to the next screen and answer some questions. Very dry stuff. I've "taken" courses on Academic Earth, which entails watching a video that was recorded of a traditional class. I've used podcasts and webcasts and interactive meetings. This is the first online class at TC I've taken, and the first of this style with weekly assignments and interactions. This semester I am also taking Cognition and Learning online and I'm anxious to see how the structure of these two courses are similar or differ.

Recently I started using Rosetta Stone software. My grandfather used to teach me Italian when I was a kid. In junior high and high school I took three years of Spanish and in high school and college I took three years of Italian. With all that time I'm still not conversational in either language. I've always wanted to be able to speak Italian fluently, so I finally took the dive and got Rosetta Stone. It's a really interesting approach they use, it's very intuitive and they manage to teach concepts like masculine and feminine words and singular and plural words almost by example instead of telling or explaining. I like it a lot and I think it's very clever how they've set it up. But what really floored me was what happened when my kids each started using it. I waited in the wings expecting that they would ask for help and have questions. I thought the software was intuitive to me because of the background I already had, but to my surprise, it appeared that it was just as intuitive for my kids. At eight and nine, they've had some exposure to Italian, but nothing formal or comprehensive. Nevertheless, they're doing wonderfully! Who knows, by the time we get back to Italy over the summer, maybe we'll all be fluent!

In addition to working on my Italian, I'm trying to remember to put my researcher hat on and observe how my kids interact with the software and make note of strengths and weaknesses. I'll share any interesting discoveries I come upon.