Whiteboards

Just a new way to conduct old-fashioned teaching?

Net Neutrality and Education

Why does it matter?

11.21.2010

Online Learning - The Wild West of Education

[This post has also been cross-posted on building a new box, my blog on school reform.]


I've recently begun a three-class course to receive an add-on endorsement to my teaching certificate in Online Learning. In my position as an instructional technology specialist - and in a desire to be able to teach online myself - I thought it was an important move.


Only a month into the first course, I'm finding that the anticipation is that it will be a very metacognitive course. After all, the first course is Introduction to Virtual Learning Environments - taught in a virtual learning environment. The courses are entirely online with no face-to-face (albeit I'm taking the course with a handful of teachers that are at my school, which allows us some interaction not normally present in an online course). This brings two things to mind.


The first is whether the course (or courses) will meet their own expectations. On the surface, I'm sure they will. As the audience for the course is educators who are already exposed to a high degree of technology (including Angel Learning, the course management system used throughout my district and to deliver these endorsement courses), it's not as if entirely new content is being delivered - in this case, the course differs greatly from, for example, an online physics course for a student who has not had physics before. I'm hoping that the current course reflects a very different model of teaching and learning, which leads into my second thought.


That second thought (hold on tight - it's much broader than the first) is that online learning is as different from traditional classroom learning as the computer is from the pencil and paper - and the methods by which online learning are implemented and built need to be just as different. When the computer was first introduced into the classroom over two decades ago, it was frequently used as little more than a drill instructor - repetitive practice was simply transferred from paper and pencil to the computer. Teachers - particularly younger teachers who were more connected to the blossoming Information Age - had an idea that it could be a revolutionary classroom tool; they just didn't quite know what to do with it yet. Now that computers are found in almost every classroom - in many cases, multiple computers and computing devices - the use of those computers looks incredibly different than it did all those years ago. (I was going to use the phrase the classroom of today instead of the use of those computers, but the fact is, it doesn't. That's a topic for another post...)


Online learning has the potential to take that same step - potential, I say. I'm not sure it's done that way very much in current online learning classes. A colleague of mine is working on a Master's degree of Instructional Technology from the University of Georgia, and there is a significant online component to it. However, he continually laments that the online course is poorly constructed and a joke - he frequently logs on, and goes about other business while the traditional classroom element of a lecturing professor is replaced with a video of a lecturing professor. It pains me to hear this, because this is a course in training other educators to use that same technology - and it becomes a vicious cycle. Fortunately, my colleague knows it's a poor example - or more accurately, an example of what not to do - but it still, I think, is representative of a typical online learning environment: one in which the traditional classroom has been replicated as much as possible.


The online learning environment is the Wild West of education - some pioneers are starting to venture out into it, and are figuring out how best to tame the land, but overall settlers are still trying to bring the comforts of home with them to this new land. That environment, however, appeals to and suits an entirely different type of learner. Lisa Nielsen over at The Innovative Educator has a post on 10 Reasons Students Say They Prefer Learning Online, as well as an introductory guide to online learning. Included in that post is a graphic map of issues and considerations for using and implementing :




The most interesting this I find about this map is the note about next generation models of online learning, and how they need to reset the model to focus on competency-based learning. See it? The small DNA-like graphic tucked into the bottom of the diagram? I think that's a significant part of the problem with online learning - the notion that the method of teaching in an online learning environment is so different from traditional classroom teaching that it's considered "where we're going next." Unfortunately, like so many things in education, if we wait to go there next, we may never get there because where we are now will be so entrenched in the system that it'll be acceptable as the way things should be done.


If you are an online learning pioneer in some way - an online teacher, a district official overseeing or implementing online learning, a content developer writing content for an online environment, and so on - recognize that this is a radically different learning environment, and as a result the same old way of doing things  no longer works. You have to find ways to engage your students when they're self-directed. You have to create authentic, relevant, honest assignments that will benefit your students - they will get something out of it besides learning how to quickly finish it. You have to use the interactive tools of your learning management system to provide students authentic feedback. Don't be afraid to try something new, maybe something not tested yet by lots of folks - there's a learning experience both for you and for the online students in analyzing why a certain type of activity didn't work - that in itself will be an important skill for students who are graduating from our institutions. All of this takes time and energy, yes - but does it take any more time and energy than that first year you were a teacher and had to create all of your traditional classroom materials and lessons yourself? 


Let's go, folks - hitch up the wagons and head West, while you still have time to shape the frontier in the way you want. Otherwise, all the land will be taken by folks who do the same thing as back East - and it won't look any different, and it won't move us forward.

11.07.2010

The Geopolitics of URL Shorteners

Just a couple of days ago, I had a "well, duh" moment that I hadn't really thought through, regarding the use of URL shorteners and their domains.

A URL shortener is a site where you can take a long URL that's not very easy to remember - such as http://www.theresagreatsiteyouhavetosee.com/and-the-page-is/in-a-directory/andheresthepage.html - and shorten it to something more manageble, like http://sho.rt/url. The URL shortening service simply redirects visitors to your original link, and many services also include tracking and statistics tools.

One of the most popular is http://bit.ly, mainly because it is easily integrated with Twitter. You can shorten a URL and send it out via Twitter all at once. Another service is http://ow.ly. Both feature extremely short URLs, and create their short URLs using 4-6 alphanumeric characters.

What I was aware of with these sites - but didn't really think about - was the top-level domain. Top-level domains ("TLD") are the part after the last dot in the overall domain, and tell you what type of site you are visiting. The most well-known TLD's are .com, .org, and .net, which are intended to indicate a commercial, organizational, and network site respectively. In addition, there is .edu (indicating an educational site, reserved exclusively for higher institutions), .gov (governmental sites), and .mil (military establishment sites) - all three of these are closely governed. (Whereas any user can register a .com, .org, or .net domain, such is not the case with those three; they are internally distributed.)

The three-character domains are certainly not the only ones - some newer TLD's with four or more characters like .mobi, .info, and .name have come into use in the last few years. The other TLD set that have been around since the beginning are county codes. For example, sites that end in .us are United States organizations. (Sometimes these are subdivided further, for example many school systems use .k12.XX.us, where XX is their state abbreviation.) Other country codes are .uk for Great Britian, .ru for Russia, .ca for Canada, .au for Australia, and so forth. (Wikipedia has an article listing almost all of the top-level domains, country-based or otherwise.

The whole point of this post is this notion of country code TLD's - particularly, using them for something that's not country-specific. Some country codes have become desirable of late because of their potential use in creating easily-remembered URLs. For example, Columbia's .co is a possible alternative to .com, as both could stand for company. Another well-known domain (but not necessarily the country) is .tv, which belongs to the country of the islands of Tuvalu. (Do you know where they are? I had to look them up.)

In the case of my previously-used URL shorteners, they use the TLD of .ly, which is Libya. With many more services trying to capitalize on the adverb-conjuring .ly domain, Libya has now begun to crack down on registrations and activities of those sites - it has disabled some services which it claims is in violation of religious law.

Another URL shortener service that I was recently introduced to is http://goo.gl - Google's service. The one thing I don't like about it (as compared to my previously-used bit.ly) is that you can't create customized shortened URLs - you must use the 5-character string Google creates for your link.

But as its domain is based in the much more stable Greenland, it might still be a wise switch.

What I Learned @ GaETC 2010

This week, the Georgia Educational Technology Conference wrapped up. I was able to attend for the first time in several years, and learned a few things:
  1. I really enjoy conferences. It's a chance to meet a variety of people, and learn from them, whether it's listening to them present, participating in discussions during sessions and workshops, or even "coffee pot" conversations. If you have the opportunity, I recommend you attend - whether it's a more general conference like GaETC or a more discipline-specific one, it's an opportunity to learn a lot.
  2. I really enjoy presenting at conferences. I gave two sessions this year: one on Bring Your Own Technology (which I've written about before), and issues with students and teachers interacting on Facebook. Both were fairly well-attended and, I think, successful. The conference provided session-specific feedback websites, but I have not yet received information about what people submitted for mine.
  3. I'm a big fan of Patrick Crispen - as is everybody else. If you've never heard Patrick speak, you should. He's a professor of education at the University of Southern California, and has been a regular GaETC guest for the past several years. He's engaging and knowledgeable, and popular, as judging by the number of his concurrent sessions that were at capacity.
    Check out his website, NetSquirrel.
  4. Conference locations need to accommodate their clientele. Ironically, the biggest problem that many thought was that the wireless connectivity was somewhat unreliable. This is one conference which it could be assumed that every attendee would have some internet-capable device, and would be expecting to use it. The wireless connection also affected several presentations, and some presenters had exclusively online content which, needless to say, made their presentations difficult.
There were some specific technology ideas that I also learned, but I thought I'd save those for another post (or several).