Educause churns out these small reports periodically, and the latest one is about microblogging (e.g., Twitter is the most famous way to microblog presently).  The report is broken down into these areas: what is it, who's doing it, the significance, the downsides, the implications, etc.  It's a great place to get started on different teaching technologies.

Garvey

J. Garvey Pyke, Ed.D. | Center for Teaching and Learning | UNC Charlotte

Professor Larry Spence at Penn State relates how he struggled to "kick the cynicism monkey" and stop blaming his students and instead turn his attentions on himself.

I saw students in terms of their deficits, not mine. They couldn’t construct or evaluate arguments; fathom an author’s conceptual framework; read for connections and patterns; write engaging and vibrant prose; and most of all bring knowledge of culture or history to their learning. They were impossible.

Seen that way there was no way to teach them... Blame the student stories stopped...that day. My students weren’t perfect but they were all the materials I had. I couldn’t do my job without them. In my head there was a new rule – the students are the stuff with which you work. You can’t blame them. If they don’t learn, you haven’t taught well enough. To follow that rule was hard.

I found the whole article interesting.  It's not a piece that hands out easy answers or a formula for success in this arena.  Sometimes, it can be helpful just to see the struggle through someone else's eyes.

Garvey

J. Garvey Pyke, Ed.D. | Center for Teaching and Learning | UNC Charlotte

The US Dept of Education just released a report [PDF] on the effectiveness of online education.  Abstract:

A systematic search of the research literature from 1996 through July 2008 identified more than a thousand empirical studies of online learning. Analysts screened these studies to find those that (a) contrasted an online to a face-to-face condition, (b) measured student learning outcomes, (c) used a rigorous research design, and (d) provided adequate information to calculate an effect size. As a result of this screening, 51 independent effects were identified that could be subjected to meta-analysis. The meta-analysis found that, on average, students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction. The difference between student outcomes for online and face-to-face classes—measured as the difference between treatment and control means, divided by the pooled standard deviation—was larger in those studies contrasting conditions that blended elements of online and face-to-face instruction with conditions taught entirely face-to-face. Analysts noted that these blended conditions often included additional learning time and instructional elements not received by students in control conditions. This finding suggests that the positive effects associated with blended learning should not be attributed to the media, per se. An unexpected finding was the small number of rigorous published studies contrasting online and face-to-face learning conditions for K–12 students. In light of this small corpus, caution is required in generalizing to the K–12 population because the results are derived for the most part from studies in other settings (e.g., medical training, higher education). 

Did you catch that?  The caveat, too?  Let's look at some of the more interesting bullet points, excerpted from the executive summary:

• Instruction combining online and face-to-face elements had a larger advantage relative to purely face-to-face instruction than did purely online instruction. ... An important issue to keep in mind in reviewing these findings is that many studies did not attempt to equate (a) all the curriculum materials, (b) aspects of pedagogy and (c) learning time in the treatment and control conditions. Indeed, some authors asserted that it would be impossible to have done so. Hence, the observed advantage for online learning in general, and blended learning conditions in particular, is not necessarily rooted in the media used per se and may reflect differences in content, pedagogy and learning time.

• Studies in which learners in the online condition spent more time on task than students in the face-to-face condition found a greater benefit for online learning. The mean effect size for studies with more time spent by online learners was +0.46 compared with +0.19 for studies in which the learners in the face-to-face condition spent as much time or more on task (Q = 3.88, p < .05).

• Effect sizes were larger for studies in which the online and face-to-face conditions varied in terms of curriculum materials and aspects of instructional approach in addition to the medium of instruction. Analysts examined the characteristics of the studies in the meta-analysis to ascertain whether features of the studies’ methodologies could account for obtained effects. Six methodological variables were tested as potential moderators: (a) sample size, (b) type of knowledge tested, (c) strength of study design, (d) unit of assignment to condition, (e) instructor equivalence across conditions, and (f) equivalence of curriculum and instructional approach across conditions. Only equivalence of curriculum and instruction emerged as a significant moderator variable (Q = 5.40, p < .05). Studies in which analysts judged the curriculum and instruction to be identical or almost identical in online and face-to-face conditions had smaller effects than those studies where the two conditions varied in terms of multiple aspects of instruction (+0.20 compared with +0.42, respectively). Instruction could differ in terms of the way activities were organized (for example as group work in one condition and independent work in another) or in the inclusion of instructional resources (such as a simulation or instructor lectures) in one condition but not the other.

• Blended and purely online learning conditions implemented within a single study generally result in similar student learning outcomes. When a study contrasts blended and purely online conditions, student learning is usually comparable across the two conditions.

• Elements such as video or online quizzes do not appear to influence the amount that students learn in online classes. The research does not support the use of some frequently recommended online learning practices. Inclusion of more media in an online application does not appear to enhance learning. The practice of providing online quizzes does not seem to be more effective than other tactics such as assigning homework.

• Online learning can be enhanced by giving learners control of their interactions with media and prompting learner reflection. Studies indicate that manipulations that trigger learner activity or learner reflection and self-monitoring of understanding are effective when students pursue online learning as individuals.

• Providing guidance for learning for groups of students appears less successful than does using such mechanisms with individual learners. When groups of students are learning together online, support mechanisms such as guiding questions generally influence the way students interact, but not the amount they learn.

OK, so online learning is better when it requires more time on task, active learning, diverse ways of learning, et al.?  Sounds familiar.

The report is definitely worth examining.  It's not simply an "online is better" type of report: it truly delves into the issues regarding which methods show gains and why.  It's not the medium that makes online learning better but the thoughtful, purposeful, and intentional instructional design decisions used to create the courses (a combination of time spent, curriculum, and pedagogy, according to the report).

Garvey

J. Garvey Pyke, Ed.D. | Center for Teaching and Learning | UNC Charlotte

Professor Alan Bloom at Valparaiso University has an innovative way for dealing with cell phones in his classroom:

I’ve devised a “cell phone protocol” that has enabled me to make peace with the problem. As it appears in the syllabus, the protocol reads: “Please turn off your cell phone ringer while in class. Mind you, violation of this protocol will demand punishment—though one that clearly does not infringe on your eighth amendment rights.” I then ask someone to identify the eighth amendment, and as a history professor, I’m happy to report that someone can always explain the constitutional limits on cruel and unusual punishment.

I advise students to turn off their ringers in class, and I note that if someone’s phone rings, he or she will have to provide the class with food. It doesn’t have to be an extravagant meal (remember the eighth amendment!), but there must be enough for everyone. In the beginning, I offered the possibility of a subsidy to economically unable students. However, I abandoned it once I realized that if students could afford a cell-phone package, they could provide treats to about 30 classmates.

This policy has had some interesting effects.  Read the whole thing.  Can you think of an innovative policy for your classroom that matches your style, your students' needs, and your content area?

Garvey

J. Garvey Pyke, Ed.D. | Center for Teaching and Learning | UNC Charlotte

Are you looking to avoid job burnout, learn more about Fair Use and the TEACH ACT or improve your online course? Then you may be interested in one of the upcoming Sloan-C (Sloan Consortium) online workshops. They have several scheduled throughout the summer on these and other timely topics.

UNC Charlotte has a full membership to Sloan-C so you can take any of their workshops at no cost to you--just send us an email and tell us which workshop you would like to attend. They take place over the course of 10 days so you have ample opportunity to participate.

I have personally taken a number of these workshops and found them quite valuable. We have also received testimonials from faculty. Check out their schedule and see if a workshop appeals to you!

Sam Eneman

Apparently, there is a pop psychology book called, Yes! 50 Scientifically Proven Ways to Be Persuasive, and reading through a summary of these techniques made me see some implications for teaching and learning. For those of us who teach critical thinking skills, it may be helpful to use this list, or portions of it, with our students (e.g., have them evaluate the effectiveness of these techniques for a particular assignment). Additionally, a few of these could be used directly by instructors as we design portions of our course.  For example, item 16 and 17 could be useful when asking students to commit to assignment topics, group projects, study teams, etc. 

Garvey

J. Garvey Pyke, Ed.D. | Center for Teaching and Learning | UNC Charlotte

What impact will Google Wave have on the LMS?  I have no idea, but it could be big. 

Never heard of Google Wave?  Here is some reading:

• Google Wave: A Complete Guide
• The Top 6 Game-Changing Features of Google Wave
• Live Moodle Site With Wave Widgets to Play With (login as moodler/moodler)
• Google Wave API For Education; Official Google Labs Wave API Site

Is it email?  A wiki?  Both of these and much more?  What does this mean for Google docs?  Gmail?  Collaboration?  Moodle?

Garvey

J. Garvey Pyke, Ed.D. | Center for Teaching and Learning | UNC Charlotte

That's the title of a provocative post by Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger on his blog [h/t Stephen Downes].  Sanger mentions several things he dislikes about Web 2.0:

1. Facelessness.  Knowing people online isn't the same as knowing them in real life.
2. Groupthink.  "Groupthink [is] inherent in the design of so many Web 2.0 websites...a community that has a variety of mechanisms that allow us to reward people who agree with us and punish those who disagree with us. Those are the tools of conformity and groupthink." 
3. It's a waste of time.  The useful features are not as prominent as the popular ones (e.g., the endless quizzes such as "Which Star Trek Character Are You?").

Sanger's summation:

Wasting our free time in faceless groupthink, staring at a screen instead of jostling shoulders or holding hands — is that where we in post-industrial societies are going? Is it where we want to be going? If you’re a kid, is that what you want society to be like when you grow up? If you’re a parent, is that what you want for your kids?

And if not, how can we use our boundless creativity to find a solution?

He admits that Web 2.0 is here to stay, so he doesn't want us to miss the point.  This isn't just a guy railing against new technology.  Instead, he's asking us to push further.  I think he's making an extreme case, but there is some truth to what he says. 

Garvey

J. Garvey Pyke, Ed.D. | Center for Teaching and Learning | UNC Charlotte

Here are some pictures from our last day of Summer Institute 2009.

Cynthia (Cindy) Wolf Johnson

read more »

Here are pictures from today's optional Summer Institute sessions, Best Practices for Engaging Students and Managing Classes with Moodle and Instructional Technology Toolkit: Using Multimedia, Clickers, and More to Engage Students.

Richard Hartshorne

read more »