e-Learning UPDATE: Clickers in UMC Classrooms (short version)
Today’s academic medical center faculty were typically trained under an educational system based entirely on didactic lectures. Because the choice of teaching method is often based on what is known and familiar, didactic lecture methods have persisted. However, if the aim is to teach critical thinking or change attitudes beyond the simple transmission of factual knowledge, then lectures alone, without active involvement of the students, are not the most effective method of teaching. The problem is how to organize lecture material so that the learning needs of individual students are better addressed. One solution to that problem is to design lecture sessions that contain a variety of activities which will stimulate individual students to think; such activities include in-class discussion, working problems during lecture time, questions included in the lecture, and quizzes at the end of lecture.
Asking students questions is one of the simplest, but most effective, techniques to engage learners. At the beginning of a lecture, questions may serve as an advance organizational tool which provides a framework for the students to frame the lecture content. Questions – either at the beginning of or during the lecture – provides a means for repetition of the content and for reinforcement of important concepts. Surveying the class is useful for identifying needs and interests of the audience, assessing the students’ baseline level of knowledge, and motivating students to focus on the topic. The development of classroom response systems allows for real-time class participation in a large scale format without sacrificing control of the classroom, and brings with it a small classroom feel.
Many of our current medical students are Tech-savvy ‘Millennials’, who have lots of gadgets, like to multitask and expect to control what, when and how they learn. Also termed the Net Generation or Digital Natives, they are taught by “Digital Immigrants” who came to computing late in life. Many millennial students need customizable, flexible learning formats that allow students to construct their own understanding with regular interventions to combat their fear of boredom and short attention span. Our students must be actively engaged with the material we are asking them to learn. Part of the process of getting students to become critical thinkers involves getting us (the faculty) to become aware of, not only what they are thinking, but also how they are thinking.
Personal Response Systems (PRS), portable electronic devices that allow answer input in real time, have been used successfully by many schools since the 1990s. PRS can be used in a way that combines student interaction and assessment to enhance classroom productivity by: graphing student responses to identify content areas for additional review/re-teaching; facilitating study by discussing how answers to questions can be found through a critical thinking process modeled by the professor and practiced in class; testing student recall of important concepts prior to and during lecture to assess retention; and measuring learning outcomes through brief in-class formative assessments. Many students found that lectures became more engaging when the lecturer involved the students in a discussion of course content directed by the student’s participation. Students at Minot State University found that the addition of PRS to their classes helped them understand the course material, prepare for exams and improve their overall learning and retention of course material. Students also found that their positive experiences led to their desire for more courses to incorporate technology tools into the curriculum in that these tools present course content in ways that appeal to different learning styles. Faculty reported that incorporation of technology added to their preparation time but that student success made it worth the effort.
UMMC has standardized on Interwrite PRS RF© (Personal Response System, Radio Frequency) Clickers. Some UMC freshmen are now required to purchase a standard clicker from the UMC bookstore. They will keep their clicker for all four years of their program. Grant funds were used to purchase 100 clickers and several RF receivers for use in this project. These will be available for check out from Audio Visual services. PRS RF receivers and software were installed on ACE network classroom computers. Biochemistry, Microbiology, Pharmacology and Physiology professors used clickers in the medicine curriculum this past year. The initial results of these trials will be presented in the workshop.
Clickers in UMC Classrooms Workshop! Tuesday, June 3, 2008 in R153, 12-12:50. Professors will demonstrate how they use these devices in their classes – Audience Participation Required! Then at 1:00 - Afternoon Breakouts – Faculty/Staff Training: “How to Use Clickers in YOUR Class”.
The full-length version of this article (with references) is posted just below.
Friday, May 2, 2008
Clickers in UMC Classrooms
e-Learning UPDATE: Clickers in UMC Classrooms (long version)
Bill Lushbaugh[1], Bob Kramer[2], Bruce Couch[2], John Schweinfurth[3], Ed Swiatlo[4] and Richard O’Callaghan[1]. UMMC Departments of Microbiology[1], Pharmacology[2], Otolaryngology and Communicative Science[3] and Infectious Diseases[4]. Funded by a grant from UMMC Faculty Development.
Today’s academic medical center faculty was typically trained under an education system based entirely on didactic lectures. Because the choice of teaching method is typically based on known and familiar methods, didactic lecture methods have persisted. However, if the aim is to teach thinking or change attitudes beyond the simple transmission of factual knowledge, then lectures alone, without active involvement of the students, are not the most effective method of teaching.[1] The goals of teaching as discovered by Isaacs are: to arouse and keep students’ interest, to give students facts and details, to make students think critically about the subject, and to prepare students for their own private studies by demonstration of problem solving and professional reasoning.[2] Isaacs notes however, that only two of these purposes are well suited to didactic lectures. The problem then is how to organize lecture material so that individual student’s learning needs are better addressed. Gibbs suggests that lecture sessions contain a variety of activities designed to stimulate individual students to think.[3] These activities include in-class discussion, working problems during lecture time, questions included in the lecture, and quizzes at the end of lecture, among others.
An important facet of interactive learning techniques is engagement of the students through reciprocal learning. Palincsar, Brown, and Campione define reciprocal teaching as a dialogue between teacher and student.[4] This dialogue is described as reciprocal because each learner acts in response to another. This interaction may occur between teacher and student or between students. The dialogue is structured by the use of four strategies, sometimes known as the Fabulous Four: predicting, questioning, clarifying and summarizing.[5] The goal of reciprocal teaching is to use real-time feedback to enhance students' comprehension, develop self-regulatory and monitoring skills, and improve motivation. Reciprocal teaching is a constructivist method of teaching, the basis of which is that students draw their own meanings from what they hear in lecture, based on their understanding of the content combined with their prior experiences. Real-time interaction with the teacher and other students is critical to reciprocal teaching.
Asking the students questions is one of the simplest but most effective techniques to engage learners. At the beginning of a lecture, questions may serve as advance organizers which provide a framework for the students upon which to hang the lecture content, and as repetition. Surveying the class is useful for identifying the audience’ needs and interests, assessing the students’ baseline level of knowledge, and to motivate students to focus on the topic.
With respect to reciprocal learning, questions can be used to: focus attention, arouse interest, enhance inclusion by drawing out the reticent learner, obtain student feedback on the progress of the lecture, assess the level of understanding, assess the ability to apply learned concepts and knowledge, stimulate and guide thinking and reflection, explore different viewpoints, promote discussion and sharing, keep the discussion on track, summarize progress and consolidate learning. Questioning and surveying a large seminar class with over 100 members can be difficult. Students are unlikely to participate and it is unrealistic to achieve any consensus in an efficient time. The development of classroom response systems allows for real-time, class participation in a large scale format without sacrificing control of the classroom and brings with it a “small classroom feel.”
Many of our current medical students are “Tech-savvy ‘Millennials’, [who] have lots of gadgets, like to multitask and expect to control what, when and how they learn.”[6] Also termed the Net Generation or Digital Natives,[7] they are taught by “Digital Immigrants” who came to computing late in life. In the words of Marc Prensky, “Our students are no longer the people our educational system was designed to teach… They really do think differently from the rest of us … we now have a new generation with a very different blend of cognitive skills than its predecessors.”[8] Many millennial students have affection for technology, team work and visual learning. They need customizable, flexible learning formats that allow students to construct their own understanding with regular interventions to combat their fear of boredom and short attention span.[9] Digital Native students might better relate to their Digital Immigrant educators if the Immigrants adapted to the Native’s preferred learning styles.”7, 8 Our “students must be actively engaged with the material we are trying to teach them… Part of the process of getting students to become critical thinkers involves getting them to practice meta-cognition, that is, they must become aware of not only what they are thinking but also how they are thinking.”[10]
PRS, in use since the 1990s, have received accolades at a number of institutions for meeting many needs of both Digital Native students and their Digital Immigrant educators.[11], [12], [13] PRS can be used as a combination of interaction and assessment to enhance classroom productivity by: a) visually graphing student responses to identify content areas for additional review/re-teaching; b) facilitating group or independent study by discussing how answers to questions can be found through a critical thinking process modeled by the professor and practiced in class; c) testing student recall of important concepts prior to and during lecture to assess retention; and d) measuring learning outcomes through brief in-class formative assessments. Many students find that boring lectures, normally “not worth attending,” became more engaging when the lecturer took a break from their usual didactic presentation and involved the students in a discussion of course content directed by their participation. In a study at Minot State University in 200713, students found that addition of PRS to their classes, helped them understand the course material, prepare for exams and improve their overall learning and retention of course material. Faculty reported that incorporation of technology added to their preparation time but student success made it worth the effort. Training and support were important to the success of the program. Students found that their positive experiences led to their desire for more courses to incorporate technology tools into the curriculum in that these tools present course content in ways that appeal to different learning styles.
UMMC standardized on Interwrite PRS RF© (Personal Response System, Radio Frequency) Clickers. Some Dentistry, Health Related Professions and all School of Medicine freshman students were required to purchase a standard clicker from the UMC bookstore for their classes in 2007. They will keep their clicker throughout all four years of their programs. Faculty Development grant funds were used to purchase 100 clickers and several RF receivers for use by the faculty involved in the project. The departments of Physiology, and Biochemistry in the M1 year and the departments of Microbiology and Pharmacology in the M2 year participated in the introduction of clickers into the SOM curriculum. PRS RF receivers and software were installed on selected classroom computers. The initial results of these trials will be presented in the second half of the Clicker Training day described below.
Clickers in UMC Classrooms! Tuesday, June 3, 2008 in R153
12:-12:50 - Clickers in UMC Classrooms – Our professors share their experiences with clickers and demonstrate how they use these devices in their classes – Audience participation required! We will be using clickers in these classes!
1:3 - Afternoon Breakouts – Faculty/Staff Training: “How to Use Clickers in YOUR Class”.
Additional Reading:
EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative, 7 Things you should know about clickers. 2005. http://connect.educause.edu/Library/ELI/7ThingsYouShouldKnowAbout/39379
Duncan, Douglas, Clickers: a new teaching aid with exceptional promise. 2006. Astronomy Education Review, 5(1):70-88, 2006-2007 http://aer.noao.edu/cgi-bin/article.pl?id=194
Beatty, I. 2004. Transforming Student Learning with Classroom Communication Systemshttp://connect.educause.edu/Library/ECAR/TransformingStudentLearni/40085
Martyn, M. 2007. Clickers in the Classroom: an Active Learning Approach. Educause Quarterly 2007(2)71-74. http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/EQM0729.pdf
Search: EDUCAUSE CONNECT/Teaching and learning/Instructional Technologies/Classroom Response Systems http://connect.educause.edu/term_view/Classroom+Response+Systems
References Cited:
[1]. Ramsden, P. 1992. Learning to teach in higher education. London, Rutledge.
[2]. Issacs, G. 1994. Lecturing practices and note-taking purposes. Studies in Higher Education. 19(2):203 17.
[3]. Gibbs, G. 1992. Lecturing to more students, Oxford, UK. Polytechnics and Colleges Funding Council.
[4]. Palincsar, AS., Brown, AL. and Campione, J. 1989. Structured dialogues among communities of first grade learners. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, California.
[5]. Oczkus, L. 2003. Reciprocal teaching at work: strategies for improving reading comprehension. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
[6]. Carlson, S. 2005. The Net Generation goes to college. The Chronicle:10/7/2005 http://chronical.com/weekly/v52/i07/07/a.3401.htm
[7]. Prensky, Marc. 2001. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part 1. On the Horizon, NCB University Press, Vol. 9(5, October) http://www.scribd.com/doc/9799/Prensky-Digital-Natives-Digital-Immigrants-Part1
[8]. Prensky, Marc. 2001. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part II. Do They Really Think Differently? On the Horizon, NCB University Press, 9(6, December ) http://www.scribd.com/doc/9800/Prensky-Digital-Natives-Digital-Immigrants-Part2
[9]. Partridge, H. and Hallam, G. 2006. Educating the Millennial Generation for evidence based information practice. Library Hi Tech, 24(3):400-419.
[10]. McGlynn, A. and Provitera, B. 2005. Teaching Millennials, Our Newest Cultural Cohort. The Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education. 16:(October):9-20. http://www.eddigest.com/
[11]. University of Milwaukee Student Response Systems (SRS), The UW-System Clicker Projecthttp://www4.uwm.edu/ltc/srs/ Educause 2006 Presentation: "Clickers" in the Classroom: Analyses from the University of Wisconsin System Project -- PDF file of presentation given at EDUCAUSE 2006 in Dallas, Tx.
[12]. Ohio State University, Technology Enhanced Learning and Research (TELR) Site: http://www.telr.osu.edu/clickers. (project report: http://www.telr.osu.edu/clickers/about/index.htm)
[13]. Horvath, C., Warmoth, KM., Minot State University. 2007. Technology to Advance Learning: A Pilot Study. www.educause.edu/Browse/645?PARENT_ID=697.
Bill Lushbaugh[1], Bob Kramer[2], Bruce Couch[2], John Schweinfurth[3], Ed Swiatlo[4] and Richard O’Callaghan[1]. UMMC Departments of Microbiology[1], Pharmacology[2], Otolaryngology and Communicative Science[3] and Infectious Diseases[4]. Funded by a grant from UMMC Faculty Development.
Today’s academic medical center faculty was typically trained under an education system based entirely on didactic lectures. Because the choice of teaching method is typically based on known and familiar methods, didactic lecture methods have persisted. However, if the aim is to teach thinking or change attitudes beyond the simple transmission of factual knowledge, then lectures alone, without active involvement of the students, are not the most effective method of teaching.[1] The goals of teaching as discovered by Isaacs are: to arouse and keep students’ interest, to give students facts and details, to make students think critically about the subject, and to prepare students for their own private studies by demonstration of problem solving and professional reasoning.[2] Isaacs notes however, that only two of these purposes are well suited to didactic lectures. The problem then is how to organize lecture material so that individual student’s learning needs are better addressed. Gibbs suggests that lecture sessions contain a variety of activities designed to stimulate individual students to think.[3] These activities include in-class discussion, working problems during lecture time, questions included in the lecture, and quizzes at the end of lecture, among others.
An important facet of interactive learning techniques is engagement of the students through reciprocal learning. Palincsar, Brown, and Campione define reciprocal teaching as a dialogue between teacher and student.[4] This dialogue is described as reciprocal because each learner acts in response to another. This interaction may occur between teacher and student or between students. The dialogue is structured by the use of four strategies, sometimes known as the Fabulous Four: predicting, questioning, clarifying and summarizing.[5] The goal of reciprocal teaching is to use real-time feedback to enhance students' comprehension, develop self-regulatory and monitoring skills, and improve motivation. Reciprocal teaching is a constructivist method of teaching, the basis of which is that students draw their own meanings from what they hear in lecture, based on their understanding of the content combined with their prior experiences. Real-time interaction with the teacher and other students is critical to reciprocal teaching.
Asking the students questions is one of the simplest but most effective techniques to engage learners. At the beginning of a lecture, questions may serve as advance organizers which provide a framework for the students upon which to hang the lecture content, and as repetition. Surveying the class is useful for identifying the audience’ needs and interests, assessing the students’ baseline level of knowledge, and to motivate students to focus on the topic.
With respect to reciprocal learning, questions can be used to: focus attention, arouse interest, enhance inclusion by drawing out the reticent learner, obtain student feedback on the progress of the lecture, assess the level of understanding, assess the ability to apply learned concepts and knowledge, stimulate and guide thinking and reflection, explore different viewpoints, promote discussion and sharing, keep the discussion on track, summarize progress and consolidate learning. Questioning and surveying a large seminar class with over 100 members can be difficult. Students are unlikely to participate and it is unrealistic to achieve any consensus in an efficient time. The development of classroom response systems allows for real-time, class participation in a large scale format without sacrificing control of the classroom and brings with it a “small classroom feel.”
Many of our current medical students are “Tech-savvy ‘Millennials’, [who] have lots of gadgets, like to multitask and expect to control what, when and how they learn.”[6] Also termed the Net Generation or Digital Natives,[7] they are taught by “Digital Immigrants” who came to computing late in life. In the words of Marc Prensky, “Our students are no longer the people our educational system was designed to teach… They really do think differently from the rest of us … we now have a new generation with a very different blend of cognitive skills than its predecessors.”[8] Many millennial students have affection for technology, team work and visual learning. They need customizable, flexible learning formats that allow students to construct their own understanding with regular interventions to combat their fear of boredom and short attention span.[9] Digital Native students might better relate to their Digital Immigrant educators if the Immigrants adapted to the Native’s preferred learning styles.”7, 8 Our “students must be actively engaged with the material we are trying to teach them… Part of the process of getting students to become critical thinkers involves getting them to practice meta-cognition, that is, they must become aware of not only what they are thinking but also how they are thinking.”[10]
PRS, in use since the 1990s, have received accolades at a number of institutions for meeting many needs of both Digital Native students and their Digital Immigrant educators.[11], [12], [13] PRS can be used as a combination of interaction and assessment to enhance classroom productivity by: a) visually graphing student responses to identify content areas for additional review/re-teaching; b) facilitating group or independent study by discussing how answers to questions can be found through a critical thinking process modeled by the professor and practiced in class; c) testing student recall of important concepts prior to and during lecture to assess retention; and d) measuring learning outcomes through brief in-class formative assessments. Many students find that boring lectures, normally “not worth attending,” became more engaging when the lecturer took a break from their usual didactic presentation and involved the students in a discussion of course content directed by their participation. In a study at Minot State University in 200713, students found that addition of PRS to their classes, helped them understand the course material, prepare for exams and improve their overall learning and retention of course material. Faculty reported that incorporation of technology added to their preparation time but student success made it worth the effort. Training and support were important to the success of the program. Students found that their positive experiences led to their desire for more courses to incorporate technology tools into the curriculum in that these tools present course content in ways that appeal to different learning styles.
UMMC standardized on Interwrite PRS RF© (Personal Response System, Radio Frequency) Clickers. Some Dentistry, Health Related Professions and all School of Medicine freshman students were required to purchase a standard clicker from the UMC bookstore for their classes in 2007. They will keep their clicker throughout all four years of their programs. Faculty Development grant funds were used to purchase 100 clickers and several RF receivers for use by the faculty involved in the project. The departments of Physiology, and Biochemistry in the M1 year and the departments of Microbiology and Pharmacology in the M2 year participated in the introduction of clickers into the SOM curriculum. PRS RF receivers and software were installed on selected classroom computers. The initial results of these trials will be presented in the second half of the Clicker Training day described below.
Clickers in UMC Classrooms! Tuesday, June 3, 2008 in R153
12:-12:50 - Clickers in UMC Classrooms – Our professors share their experiences with clickers and demonstrate how they use these devices in their classes – Audience participation required! We will be using clickers in these classes!
1:3 - Afternoon Breakouts – Faculty/Staff Training: “How to Use Clickers in YOUR Class”.
Additional Reading:
EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative, 7 Things you should know about clickers. 2005. http://connect.educause.edu/Library/ELI/7ThingsYouShouldKnowAbout/39379
Duncan, Douglas, Clickers: a new teaching aid with exceptional promise. 2006. Astronomy Education Review, 5(1):70-88, 2006-2007 http://aer.noao.edu/cgi-bin/article.pl?id=194
Beatty, I. 2004. Transforming Student Learning with Classroom Communication Systemshttp://connect.educause.edu/Library/ECAR/TransformingStudentLearni/40085
Martyn, M. 2007. Clickers in the Classroom: an Active Learning Approach. Educause Quarterly 2007(2)71-74. http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/EQM0729.pdf
Search: EDUCAUSE CONNECT/Teaching and learning/Instructional Technologies/Classroom Response Systems http://connect.educause.edu/term_view/Classroom+Response+Systems
References Cited:
[1]. Ramsden, P. 1992. Learning to teach in higher education. London, Rutledge.
[2]. Issacs, G. 1994. Lecturing practices and note-taking purposes. Studies in Higher Education. 19(2):203 17.
[3]. Gibbs, G. 1992. Lecturing to more students, Oxford, UK. Polytechnics and Colleges Funding Council.
[4]. Palincsar, AS., Brown, AL. and Campione, J. 1989. Structured dialogues among communities of first grade learners. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, California.
[5]. Oczkus, L. 2003. Reciprocal teaching at work: strategies for improving reading comprehension. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
[6]. Carlson, S. 2005. The Net Generation goes to college. The Chronicle:10/7/2005 http://chronical.com/weekly/v52/i07/07/a.3401.htm
[7]. Prensky, Marc. 2001. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part 1. On the Horizon, NCB University Press, Vol. 9(5, October) http://www.scribd.com/doc/9799/Prensky-Digital-Natives-Digital-Immigrants-Part1
[8]. Prensky, Marc. 2001. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part II. Do They Really Think Differently? On the Horizon, NCB University Press, 9(6, December ) http://www.scribd.com/doc/9800/Prensky-Digital-Natives-Digital-Immigrants-Part2
[9]. Partridge, H. and Hallam, G. 2006. Educating the Millennial Generation for evidence based information practice. Library Hi Tech, 24(3):400-419.
[10]. McGlynn, A. and Provitera, B. 2005. Teaching Millennials, Our Newest Cultural Cohort. The Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education. 16:(October):9-20. http://www.eddigest.com/
[11]. University of Milwaukee Student Response Systems (SRS), The UW-System Clicker Projecthttp://www4.uwm.edu/ltc/srs/ Educause 2006 Presentation: "Clickers" in the Classroom: Analyses from the University of Wisconsin System Project -- PDF file of presentation given at EDUCAUSE 2006 in Dallas, Tx.
[12]. Ohio State University, Technology Enhanced Learning and Research (TELR) Site: http://www.telr.osu.edu/clickers. (project report: http://www.telr.osu.edu/clickers/about/index.htm)
[13]. Horvath, C., Warmoth, KM., Minot State University. 2007. Technology to Advance Learning: A Pilot Study. www.educause.edu/Browse/645?PARENT_ID=697.
Monday, April 21, 2008
BLACKBOARD UPGRADED TO ENTERPRISE
The proposal to upgrade the Blackboard (Bb) Curriculum Management System to the new Enterprise version 8 was approved and installation of the new system began in April, 2008. The “Basic to Enterprise” Bb upgrade enables use of scalable virtual drives, multiple servers and load balancing which will greatly increase the speed and responsiveness of the system. The upgrade will also add many wonderful new software features.
The major new Bb Enterprise features that faculty and staff will be excited about include:
· Adaptive Release facilitates the appropriate sequence of learning by making additional lessons/exams available to the student only upon completion or review of prior materials.
· The Performance Dashboard enables faculty to follow student progress (Early Warning System) and administer their course(s) more easily from one central location.
· The Safe Assign anti-plagiarism tool checks written assignments evaluated through Bb against national and local databases.
· Self and Peer Assessment involves students and faculty in group evaluation of class projects.
· Scholar allows faculty to share educational resources from other schools.
· The redesigned Grade Center has many new reporting and analysis features.
· Building Block Utilization allows integration with Bb modules and solutions from other vendors (like Interwrite PRS “clicker” and Respondus software).
Train the Trainer Bb classes for e-Learning Administrators and DIS support personnel begin in the first week of May, 2008. These new trainers will then teach “Bb Basic to Enterprise” classes for UMMC faculty and staff in May and June of 2008. Faculty and staff training dates will be made available soon.
There will be a luncheon lecture on “New Features of Bb Enterprise” in the lower stack classroom (R153) on May 13, 2008. All faculty and staff who are using Bb to teach their classes are urged to attend. A limited number of box lunches will be provided. Opportunities for computer lab classes on Bb Enterprise will be offered In the weeks following the lecture.
Additional information on the new features of the Bb Enterprise system is now available directly from Blackboard at their Release 8.0 site. Specific parts of the software are described in more detail at: blackboard quick tutorials release 8 and the Faculty Reference Center for release 8.
Both the old and the new Bb systems will be available for use until May 25! After May 25th, the old Bb basic system will be shut off. Bb courses in existence will be ported into the new system as they exist on that day. Thereafter, the new Bb Enterprise system will be functional and available for use. The website address will be the same. All UMMC on-line classes will be taught using the Bb Enterprise system as of Memorial Day, May 26, 2008.
The new Bb Enterprise features will be available in addition to many of the old familiar ones. The new instructor manual will be available from the UMMC e-learning webpage. Meanwhile, when you have questions please contact your ELA, Nancy Morris (DIS Bb Application Specialist) or Bill Lushbaugh (UMC e-Learning Committee Chair) at http://elearning2.umc.edu/guides/elas.pdf.
The major new Bb Enterprise features that faculty and staff will be excited about include:
· Adaptive Release facilitates the appropriate sequence of learning by making additional lessons/exams available to the student only upon completion or review of prior materials.
· The Performance Dashboard enables faculty to follow student progress (Early Warning System) and administer their course(s) more easily from one central location.
· The Safe Assign anti-plagiarism tool checks written assignments evaluated through Bb against national and local databases.
· Self and Peer Assessment involves students and faculty in group evaluation of class projects.
· Scholar allows faculty to share educational resources from other schools.
· The redesigned Grade Center has many new reporting and analysis features.
· Building Block Utilization allows integration with Bb modules and solutions from other vendors (like Interwrite PRS “clicker” and Respondus software).
Train the Trainer Bb classes for e-Learning Administrators and DIS support personnel begin in the first week of May, 2008. These new trainers will then teach “Bb Basic to Enterprise” classes for UMMC faculty and staff in May and June of 2008. Faculty and staff training dates will be made available soon.
There will be a luncheon lecture on “New Features of Bb Enterprise” in the lower stack classroom (R153) on May 13, 2008. All faculty and staff who are using Bb to teach their classes are urged to attend. A limited number of box lunches will be provided. Opportunities for computer lab classes on Bb Enterprise will be offered In the weeks following the lecture.
Additional information on the new features of the Bb Enterprise system is now available directly from Blackboard at their Release 8.0 site. Specific parts of the software are described in more detail at: blackboard quick tutorials release 8 and the Faculty Reference Center for release 8.
Both the old and the new Bb systems will be available for use until May 25! After May 25th, the old Bb basic system will be shut off. Bb courses in existence will be ported into the new system as they exist on that day. Thereafter, the new Bb Enterprise system will be functional and available for use. The website address will be the same. All UMMC on-line classes will be taught using the Bb Enterprise system as of Memorial Day, May 26, 2008.
The new Bb Enterprise features will be available in addition to many of the old familiar ones. The new instructor manual will be available from the UMMC e-learning webpage. Meanwhile, when you have questions please contact your ELA, Nancy Morris (DIS Bb Application Specialist) or Bill Lushbaugh (UMC e-Learning Committee Chair) at http://elearning2.umc.edu/guides/elas.pdf.
Friday, February 15, 2008
Presentations Enjoyed and Lessons Learned at CFTTC
CFTTC is Creating Futures Through Technology Conference 2008, February 7-8, Biloxi, MS.
CFTTC Homepage: http://sbcjcweb.sbcjc.cc.ms.us/conf/presenter/presview.asp
Presentation abstracts: http://sbcjcweb.sbcjc.cc.ms.us/conf/presenter/presview.asp
CFTTC Homepage: http://sbcjcweb.sbcjc.cc.ms.us/conf/presenter/presview.asp
Presentation abstracts: http://sbcjcweb.sbcjc.cc.ms.us/conf/presenter/presview.asp
Teaching and Learning with the Digital Natives, by Steve Yuen, USM and 10 literacy-based strategies to blend technology into core courses, by Stacy Reeves, Pokey Stanford, William Carey University. [abstract link above]
Steve is a Professor of Instructional Technology at USM who is leading faculty to learn more about meeting the challenge of teaching digital native students by modeling all the behaviors that will help us better communicate with our students. He has a blog, a home page, a podcasting center and put all three of his CFTT presentations on the web at SlideShare.com [content links below]. In his video podcast he described the digital natives and updated us on what they like and how our content can become part of their world. Stacy and Pokey said that “… it is clear that there is a strong disengagement between the instructors who are teaching in traditional styles and the college students who are tech-savvy.” Watch Steve’s slides, its like being there!
What’s new in Blackboard by Delena Hukle, Sara Johnston, ICC and FAB 5 Features of Blackboard by Tish Stewart, Jenny Jones, HCC
The Mississippi Junior Colleges in the Mississippi Virtual Community College recently upgraded their Bb installations to include the full array of Bb services and software. Their faculty have experience using the new features that will soon be available at UMC when our Black Board Upgrade is installed this spring [more on that next month]. One new Bb feature is “Assignment Manager.” This allows the instructor to require a student to study resources in sequence and complete them before taking the quiz. Then , if the quiz is passed, the student will be allowed to access additional educational material. Another feature is the “Early Warning System” that allows the instructor to easily follow the progress of all students and respond to those who need help or recognition. A 24/7/365 technical support system is now available from Bb.
Digital Toolbox for Trainers, by Craig Jackson, MSU, Open Source in Higher Education by Steve Yuen, USM and Are You Serious Its FREE! by Ray Holder, MUW
Craig, a E-Learning Specialist in the Workforce Education Section of the Research and Curriculum Unit, at Mississippi State University believes that our state we really needs “GREAT return on investment,” that means FREE! These three presentations are all about free software that does the same jobs as the >$600 program your budget won’t let you buy. Ray is a member of a “Technology Teaching Circle that meets regularly to discuss new ideas in emerging technology” at USM. The video podcast of Steve Yuen’s presentation is on the web [see web version] and the software he advocated often overlaps with that recommended by the other speakers. I scanned in Craig’s handout and its there too. This is something we need to try here, Camtasia costs >$350 each.
The USM Podcasting Pilot Project by Sharon Rouse, Steve Yuen and Sheri Rawls.
This video podcast is also on the web (see below) as Steve and other professors in the Department of Technology Education were involved in this initiative to improve student learning opportunities through use of innovative technologies. Podcasting delivered alternative course content, offered a richer learning environment and increased student podcast use on campus. Participating faculty were awarded ipods to use in the pilot project.
Wish you could have been there with me but I hope this gave you a taste of the CFTTC 2008 at the BV Casino in Biloxi! The seafood was great and my afternoon in Ocean Springs was FAB!
Links and References Cited:
Dr. Steve Yuen’s Home Page: http://dragon.ep.usm.edu/~yuen/
Dr. Steve Yuen’s Podcast Central: http://dragon.ep.usm.edu/~yuen/podcast/podcastcentral.htm
Dr. Steve Yuen’s blog Tech Learning - The Use Of Emerging Technologies In Teaching And Learning: http://scyuen.wordpress.com/
Dr. Steve Yuen’s conference presentations from his blog: http://scyuen.wordpress.com/2008/02/08/creating-futures-through-technology-conference-presentations/
OR search slideshare.net for Yuen: lang=en&submit=post&q=yuen&commit=search
Open Source in Higher Education: open-source-in-higher-education
The University of Southern Mississippi Podcasting Pilot Project the-university-of-southern-mississippis-podcasting-pilot-project
Teaching and Learning with the Digital Natives http://www.slideshare.net/scyuen/teaching-and-learning-with-the-digital-natives
A Vision of Students Today: http://youtube.com/watch?v=dGCJ46vyR9o
Digital Toolbox for Trainers, Presented by Craig Jackson, E-Learning Specialist, Workforce Education Section, Research and Curriculum Unit, Mississippi State University. mailto:Craig.Jackson@rcu.msstate.edu
http://www.mississippiworkforceuniversity.com/
Craig's slide presentation: http://www.mississippiworkforceuniversity.com/resources/presentations/DT4T/aP%20Lite%20Flash/index.html
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Episode 2, January, 2008
Problems with Prensky! Do “Digital Natives” REALLY Exist?
I was fascinated by the responses of faculty I talked with on Prensky’s Digital Immigrant:Digital Native concept. One professor expressed anger and frustration in being inundated with more “unproven educational technology” when their favorite teaching method was demonstrated to be superior in the movie “Karate Kid”. Other professors were more than miffed about being classified as “computer challenged” because of ageism or their disinterest in the latest “fads in education.” Although I spend a lot of time computing, I am so busy just teaching that I am not well informed about the latest fads in education or technology. I am trying to use this column as a way to force myself to experience something new and I’m hoping to drag a few of you along for the ride. When I was an undergraduate biology major the department chairman had a sign on his door that said “I ride a Kreb’s Cycle!” Just another passing fad? What year was that (1964)?
McGee and Diaz’s “Wikis and Podcasts and Blogs! Oh My!” is a place to start with “What is a Faculty Member Supposed to DO?” They summarized the “Latest, Greatest, and Most Promising” “Web 2.0” free online web-based technologies that share ideas, information and creations (podcasts, blogs), that promote working with others in a shared work area (Wikis) or that collect and present evidence or experiences over time (blogs). [see also 7 things you should know about Blogs and Wikis, below.]
I decided to try and take advantage of these new technologies to examine how the “Immigrants” should be teaching the “Natives” and why the “Natives” are restless! It seems that not everyone who writes blogs or wikis agrees on what to make of all this. There are dissenters out there and I have space only to summarize the high points – please punch the links and explore this extensive literature on your own!
Bill Kerr, founding author of LearningEvolves – nativesImmigrants, begins his wiki with the statement “Prensky is a good provocateur but his slogans and analysis have not been seriously critiqued.” Participants then have linked their own wikis to his by posting a link and a short summary of their opinion(s) on the subject including “the problem with Prensky”; “the myth of the digital native” and “The digital native, the digital naive and the digital divide” among others. A link will lead you to a GREAT depth of discussion from a variety of points of view. My favorite was “Digital Natives and Digital Knowledge - not necessarily a matched set”:
“Digital natives have digital expectations, not necessarily digital skills. In other words, that flock of students that some of us keep expecting - the one in which all the students can hand-code Web pages and understand the underlying structures behind our digital world - they're not coming.”
George Siemens, Connectivism Blog, Digital natives and immigrants: A concept beyond its best before date” begins with his essay on the subject and readers have submitted comments and contributions to the discussion he began. He does this every week on a different subject, it’s a personal web column on learning theory for the digital age. He begins this one with:
“Why has the idea of immigrants and natives gained so much ground, in the apparent absence of effective research? I assume the concept of immigrant/native gained popularity because it expresses emotions/feelings many educators have about next generation students. They are, like every generation before, different. The memorable distinction between immigrant/native is a theme that transfers readily amongst educators, largely because the inherent ambiguity allows us to see/speak our experiences and biases into the terms. The life we see in immigrant/native terminology is what we ourselves bring to the definition. But I don't think the distinction has merit beyond a buzz phrase that has outlived the role it initially played in getting educators to think about the different types of learners now entering our classrooms.”
Does that make you want to read more? George Siemens closes his blog with a reference to Jamie McKenzie’s review article on “Digital Nativism, Digital Delusions, and Digital Deprivation.” Jamie talks about two thinly supported claims in Prensky's work: #1 a really big discontinuity! “Throughout his article Prensky makes similar grandiose claims that are entirely unsubstantiated with any evidence. He presents no data or studies to back up a central thesis of his paper.” #2 – Brain change! “Prensky took extreme liberties with the work of Dr. Perry, not even bothering to cite his work or spell his name correctly. If anything, Perry is arguing against the digital world that Prensky welcomes and celebrates.”
In another comment on the Connectivism Blog, one of the authors of a critical review of the evidence for 'digital natives' that will appear in the British Journal of Educational Technology this year offers a copy of the paper in draft form. Bennett, Maton and Kervin conclude with:
“The time has come for a considered and disinterested examination of the assumptions underpinning claims about digital natives such that researchable issues can be identified and dispassionately investigated. This is not to say that young people are not engaged and interested in technology and that technology might not support effective learning. It is to call for considered and rigorous investigation that includes the perspectives of young people and their teachers and that genuinely seeks to understand the situation before proclaiming the need for widespread change.”
I am way behind my submission deadline because learning about new ways to learn has been so interesting this month. I hope you enjoyed the ride and join in. Explore the links and send me some comments? Maybe we need a e-Learning Wiki or Blog? I am motivated to learn more and to see how this institution could try out new educational technology not because we need to meet the needs of the restless “Natives” but because it could enable us to do more and involve a greater proportion of our students and faculty in a cycle of interested self-education and improvement. I hope its also because its fun for everyone, even the “Karate Kid”.
EDUCAUSE Publications:
CONNECT Home > EDUCAUSE Review > Archive > Volume 42, Number 6, November/December 2007
CONNECT Home > EDUCAUSE Quarterly > EQ Archives > Volume 30, Number 4, 2007
Featured Articles:
7 Things You Should Know About...
The EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative's (ELI's) 7 Things You Should Know About... series provides concise information on emerging learning technologies and related practices. Each brief focuses on a single technology or practice and describes: What it is; How it works; Where it is going; Why it matters to teaching and learning
7 Things You Should Know About Blogs
7 Things You Should Know About Wikis
Bibliography
McGee, P. and Diaz, V. Wikis and Podcasts and Blogs! Oh, My! What is a faculty member to do? Educause Review, September, 2007:29-40.
Bill Kerr, LearningEvolves – nativesImmigrants [wiki]; Blog: http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/; Website: http://www.users.on.net/~billkerr/
Siemens, George. Digital natives and immigrants: A concept beyond its best before date. Connectivism Blog. Connectivism is a learning theory for the digital age. Posted by George Siemens on October 22, 2007 2:56 PM
McKenzie. Jamie, Digital Nativism, Digital Delusions, and Digital Deprivation. in [sic.]“from now on, the educational technology journal. 17 (2) November 2007.
Bennett, S., Maton, K. & Kervin, L. (in press, 2008) The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology.
Problems with Prensky! Do “Digital Natives” REALLY Exist?
I was fascinated by the responses of faculty I talked with on Prensky’s Digital Immigrant:Digital Native concept. One professor expressed anger and frustration in being inundated with more “unproven educational technology” when their favorite teaching method was demonstrated to be superior in the movie “Karate Kid”. Other professors were more than miffed about being classified as “computer challenged” because of ageism or their disinterest in the latest “fads in education.” Although I spend a lot of time computing, I am so busy just teaching that I am not well informed about the latest fads in education or technology. I am trying to use this column as a way to force myself to experience something new and I’m hoping to drag a few of you along for the ride. When I was an undergraduate biology major the department chairman had a sign on his door that said “I ride a Kreb’s Cycle!” Just another passing fad? What year was that (1964)?
McGee and Diaz’s “Wikis and Podcasts and Blogs! Oh My!” is a place to start with “What is a Faculty Member Supposed to DO?” They summarized the “Latest, Greatest, and Most Promising” “Web 2.0” free online web-based technologies that share ideas, information and creations (podcasts, blogs), that promote working with others in a shared work area (Wikis) or that collect and present evidence or experiences over time (blogs). [see also 7 things you should know about Blogs and Wikis, below.]
I decided to try and take advantage of these new technologies to examine how the “Immigrants” should be teaching the “Natives” and why the “Natives” are restless! It seems that not everyone who writes blogs or wikis agrees on what to make of all this. There are dissenters out there and I have space only to summarize the high points – please punch the links and explore this extensive literature on your own!
Bill Kerr, founding author of LearningEvolves – nativesImmigrants, begins his wiki with the statement “Prensky is a good provocateur but his slogans and analysis have not been seriously critiqued.” Participants then have linked their own wikis to his by posting a link and a short summary of their opinion(s) on the subject including “the problem with Prensky”; “the myth of the digital native” and “The digital native, the digital naive and the digital divide” among others. A link will lead you to a GREAT depth of discussion from a variety of points of view. My favorite was “Digital Natives and Digital Knowledge - not necessarily a matched set”:
“Digital natives have digital expectations, not necessarily digital skills. In other words, that flock of students that some of us keep expecting - the one in which all the students can hand-code Web pages and understand the underlying structures behind our digital world - they're not coming.”
George Siemens, Connectivism Blog, Digital natives and immigrants: A concept beyond its best before date” begins with his essay on the subject and readers have submitted comments and contributions to the discussion he began. He does this every week on a different subject, it’s a personal web column on learning theory for the digital age. He begins this one with:
“Why has the idea of immigrants and natives gained so much ground, in the apparent absence of effective research? I assume the concept of immigrant/native gained popularity because it expresses emotions/feelings many educators have about next generation students. They are, like every generation before, different. The memorable distinction between immigrant/native is a theme that transfers readily amongst educators, largely because the inherent ambiguity allows us to see/speak our experiences and biases into the terms. The life we see in immigrant/native terminology is what we ourselves bring to the definition. But I don't think the distinction has merit beyond a buzz phrase that has outlived the role it initially played in getting educators to think about the different types of learners now entering our classrooms.”
Does that make you want to read more? George Siemens closes his blog with a reference to Jamie McKenzie’s review article on “Digital Nativism, Digital Delusions, and Digital Deprivation.” Jamie talks about two thinly supported claims in Prensky's work: #1 a really big discontinuity! “Throughout his article Prensky makes similar grandiose claims that are entirely unsubstantiated with any evidence. He presents no data or studies to back up a central thesis of his paper.” #2 – Brain change! “Prensky took extreme liberties with the work of Dr. Perry, not even bothering to cite his work or spell his name correctly. If anything, Perry is arguing against the digital world that Prensky welcomes and celebrates.”
In another comment on the Connectivism Blog, one of the authors of a critical review of the evidence for 'digital natives' that will appear in the British Journal of Educational Technology this year offers a copy of the paper in draft form. Bennett, Maton and Kervin conclude with:
“The time has come for a considered and disinterested examination of the assumptions underpinning claims about digital natives such that researchable issues can be identified and dispassionately investigated. This is not to say that young people are not engaged and interested in technology and that technology might not support effective learning. It is to call for considered and rigorous investigation that includes the perspectives of young people and their teachers and that genuinely seeks to understand the situation before proclaiming the need for widespread change.”
I am way behind my submission deadline because learning about new ways to learn has been so interesting this month. I hope you enjoyed the ride and join in. Explore the links and send me some comments? Maybe we need a e-Learning Wiki or Blog? I am motivated to learn more and to see how this institution could try out new educational technology not because we need to meet the needs of the restless “Natives” but because it could enable us to do more and involve a greater proportion of our students and faculty in a cycle of interested self-education and improvement. I hope its also because its fun for everyone, even the “Karate Kid”.
EDUCAUSE Publications:
CONNECT Home > EDUCAUSE Review > Archive > Volume 42, Number 6, November/December 2007
CONNECT Home > EDUCAUSE Quarterly > EQ Archives > Volume 30, Number 4, 2007
Featured Articles:
7 Things You Should Know About...
The EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative's (ELI's) 7 Things You Should Know About... series provides concise information on emerging learning technologies and related practices. Each brief focuses on a single technology or practice and describes: What it is; How it works; Where it is going; Why it matters to teaching and learning
7 Things You Should Know About Blogs
7 Things You Should Know About Wikis
Bibliography
McGee, P. and Diaz, V. Wikis and Podcasts and Blogs! Oh, My! What is a faculty member to do? Educause Review, September, 2007:29-40.
Bill Kerr, LearningEvolves – nativesImmigrants [wiki]; Blog: http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/; Website: http://www.users.on.net/~billkerr/
Siemens, George. Digital natives and immigrants: A concept beyond its best before date. Connectivism Blog. Connectivism is a learning theory for the digital age. Posted by George Siemens on October 22, 2007 2:56 PM
McKenzie. Jamie, Digital Nativism, Digital Delusions, and Digital Deprivation. in [sic.]“from now on, the educational technology journal. 17 (2) November 2007.
Bennett, S., Maton, K. & Kervin, L. (in press, 2008) The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
