EdTech 521: Learning Styles in the Online Classroom

Technologies for Certain Learning Styles

I am not certain that I completely agree with Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligences or similar theories of learning styles that maintain each individual learns best with one or two distinct modes of presentation or activity format.  I believe the nature of the material being learned leads itself to certain more appropriate "styles" of information retrieval or generation.  That being said, as a student I have always been drawn to activities that feature the most multi-modal opportunities to engage with the material.  That means, I have enjoyed and achieved the most success with lessons that involved auditory, visual, and kinesthetic components.  As a student I appreciate a variety of social and solitary learning experiences as well as activity types.  For example, as much as I enjoy some talents in the creative arts (music, visual art, etc.), I also believe I am mathematically intelligent, and would enjoy looking at new information from both of those "angles".

Note: I am very skeptical of any sort of questionnaire-based personality assessment, however for fun and a bit of self-reflection I completed the "Multiple Intelligences Self-Assessment" from Edutopia.

That is why, as a teacher, I particularly enjoy multidisciplinary studies and finding ways to infuse lessons or units with a wide range of activities that (hopefully) appeal to all learning styles. I believe that interest could and would easily transfer to the online environment.

For the purposes of this week's reflection assignment, I considered a learning style that I am naturally drawn to: Visual/Spatial.  Conducting an online class, I would be cognizant to present information with video, graphic cues, filmed examples, and charts. "When learning online visual learners benefit from the ability to replay simulations or videos, trace an outline on the screen, note color coding, interpret pictures, and interact with a wide variety of interactive visual media" (Gilman, 2010).  Some of the technologies or strategies that appeal to this kind of learning preference include:

1. Mind-mapping tools (e.g. Bubbl.us or MindMeister) helps students and teachers visualize cause and effect , prioritize information, compartmentalize or organize concepts, etc. in a graphic way.
2. Visual dictionaries or thesauruses (e.g. Visuwords or VisualThesaurus) create concept maps to define words or show relationships between word parts and/or synonyms
3. Multimedia posters (e.g.  Glogster).  Glogster is an interactive program whereby students share their new learning or the results of research.  Posters can include text, images, video, sound, graphic embellishments, and weblinks.
4. Visual search engines (e.g. Spezify, Google Image Search, Compfight). Students can look up images by keyword, filtering choices by size, Creative Common license, format, etc.  These tools would be useful in creating visual dictionaries or encyclopedias, or in creating multimedia reports that require embedded images.
5. Animation creation programs (e.g. GoAnimate or PowToons) or dynamic presentation tools (e.g. Prezi). These student-friendly programs have made it easy for students to take content and animate it using established characters, movement, transitions, templates, etc. 

On the flip-side, I considered tools or activities types that would enhance learning for Auditory learners. "When learning online auditory learners benefit from being able to replay recordings of lectures, videos, and other auditory sources of information" (Gilman, 2010).

1. Audio-editing software (e.g. Audacity or WavePad).  Students or teachers can record their voice and edit it as necessary (adding multi-tracks, shortening or removing segments, even changing pitch) to create audio presentations.
2. Text-to-Speech software (e.g. ReadPlease or Natural Reader), which will read web pages or documents and even translate selected text in some cases.
3. PodCasts (e.g. iTunes, PodcastDirectory, PodOmatic). Students and teachers can contribute their spoken word to podcast libraries or search for audio files on a given topic or author.  Students may prefer their teacher's spoken assignment or content explanations over written directives.  In this case, a student could subscribe to a teacher's podcast and receive regular updates of new materials.
4. Audio books online (e.g. Project Gutenberg or LearnOutLoud). Students can download books onto their mobile devices for easy access to literature or research materials.

Resources:
Gilman, C. (2010, May 5). Maximizing your learning style in school and in life. Online Learning Tips. Retrieved from http://onlinelearningtips.com/2010/05/05/maximizing-your-learning-style-in-school-and-in-life
AlKhayat, A. (2010, November 24). Effective web tools for visual, auditory and kinesthetic (VAK) learners. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/amanyh/effective-web-tools-for-visual-auditory-and-kinesthetic-vak-learners-5896370

Diploma Guide. (2008). 30 of the best educational tools for auditory, visual, and kinesthetic learners. Retrieved from http://diplomaguide.com/articles/30_of_the_Best_Educational_Tools_for_Auditory_Visual_and_Kinesthetic_Learners.html

EdTech 521: iNACOL Online Teaching Standards

Discussion of the iNACOL National Standards for Quality Online Teaching (Version 2)

Do you think these standards are all that different from good teaching standards in any environment?

Yes, a solid understanding of content and pedagogy is required to be an effective teacher.  Although the "pedagogy" piece will look different for online instruction, there are best practices that are universally applicable to the profession.  There is also the shared vision of keeping up to date with current trends and practices.  The spirit of "pioneering" and experimentation comes through in these standards, and I believe any good teaching standards should incorporate that character trait.  Standard J reiterates the "professionalism" of the teaching profession. The practice of lifelong learning (e.g. professional development and networking) as well as partnerships with other adults in the community are both required to properly support student success.

Whereas the modern teacher can get by (and in many cases be very successful) with limited knowledge of technology and online tools, an online teacher is expected to know and be able to use technology for communication, productivity, collaboration, analysis, presentation, research, and content delivery (Standard B).  These are selected based on both subject matter and student needs.  Teachers in any realm should feel empowered and be skilled at troubleshooting when things go wrong, however an online teacher has a greater responsibility to be knowledgeable about the technology being used so that he/she can serve as a go-to person when things go wrong or need attention.  An online teacher also must be more familiar with the legal and ethical issues surrounding technology use (Standard E) than an traditional classroom teacher might be, although both should be familiar with basic rules and best practices.

Student-centeredness is at the heart of Standard C, and should also be at the heart of any good teaching.  To me, this is one of the most important standards. A teacher should always be able to design and implement lessons that foster "active learning, application, interaction, participation, and collaboration".  Differentiation should be a feature in all teaching practices.  Accommodating students' physical disabilities, tailoring instruction to suit students of diverse talents, and being culturally sensitive to student backgrounds are all significant components of differentiation (Standard F).  Students should be encouraged to indulge in their own inquiry and goal-orientation.  The teacher-student relationship is important, but as in any good teaching practice, so is student-student, teacher-parent, and teacher-mentor interaction (Standard C).

The design of an online or traditional course should include "clear expectations, prompt responses, and regular feedback".  These are crucial to effective and efficient communication which leads to increased student success. It's important to note that in these standards as well as in any good teaching standards lies the idea that a student is able to approach the teacher with questions and offer feedback about the course as well. Defining objectives, establishing/communicating assessment criteria from the outset, and offering constructive, personalized feedback are all part of effective communication on the part of the instructor.  Lesson design should always feature standards-based objectives tied to assignments tied to assessments.   The data from the assessments as well as self-reflection should be used to modify the content as well (Standard I).

Which standards would not apply in a traditional brick and mortar classroom?

Standards A, B, and C underscore the role of community-building and collaboration in online learning to connect to a global community.  Teachers must be able to interact with various communication tools much more in an online setting than in a brick-and-mortar one.  In my experience, teaching methods or styles are discussed more than the tools themselves when it comes to traditional teaching practices.  The behavior and rationale is considered much more than the actual programs or tools, which on the contrary seem to dominate many conversations about blended or online teaching. (In reading Chapter 7 of our text (see below) I think it's important that is discusses how "tools" should not define us as teachers, however; They do not make us good teachers. )

While all teachers should feel prepared to facilitate and monitor communication and discussion in their class, online teachers need to be highly skilled and attuned to promote dialogue-driven learning.  This is an element of Standard C. Teachers need to guide often asynchronous class conversations into focus and prompt with questions that require critical thinking (or extend the questions of their students).

Assessment is an important practice for all teachers, but it can be particularly complicated for the online teacher.  Ensuring security of student data and the accuracy of measurement are components of this standard that are amplified for an online instructor.

Standard K, although optional, speaks to the need for strong instructional design skills.  More often than not (I would think), online teachers are responsible for the instructional design of their course, which is significantly different in "digital" format than it is in a brick and mortar setting. Multimedia, web resources, LMS options, and project development in an online setting is much more involved for the online teacher.

All in all, however, I believe the standards for effective online teaching are really not that much different from those of good teaching in any format.  That's why I think it is rewarding for a teacher to be able to try out face-to-face, blended, and online teaching at various points in his/her career to see how learning best practices in one format can improve one's craft in another format.

I believe Chapter 7 of our course textbook Making the Move to K-12 Online Teaching summarizes many of these standards in its discussion of best practices for quality lesson design.  I can see its value as a sort of "rubric" for self-reflection and analysis of our course design and teaching practices.

I also found the comparison of the LMS to a physical classroom space helpful.  I am concerned that I have limited experience working with LMS options at this point, but will make a concerted effort to dabble in at least one to see what options it provides.

Have you identified any authentic activities, virtual activities, and/or simulations that you might like to try with your students?

I am anxious to try Skype in the Classroom to connect students with both field experts and other classrooms around the world.  Our school has received fantastic telepresence equipment through a local grant, and this is currently underutilized. I would also like to learn more about virtual field trip options to suggest to my elementary and middle school teacher colleagues, especially museums (e.g. Smithsonian). A great resource for quick and easy simulations, especially for math and science, can be found here: http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulations/category/new.  At this point I am guided tremendously by the needs of my teacher colleagues, for whom I serve as a resource.

* * * * *

Side note: Here is the initial development of my asynchronous lesson plan for this week's assignment.

EdTech 521: Collaborative Discussions and Netiquette Presentations

These past several weeks we have had the opportunity to experience online collaboration and consensus building.  We split into groups of four to gather our thoughts, opinions, and research about netiquette in the online classroom.  Our group chose to create a collaborative Google doc to take notes. We used different colored text to indicate each contributor's messages.  We also used the comments feature to highlight or suggest alternatives to ideas our teammates had posted. (Example here.) Before submitting a final document to the class (which reminded me of a jigsaw or think-pair-share method), our team agreed to meet synchronously using Google Hangouts to discuss our overall plan.

The meeting was a success.  Everyone was able to get online at more or less the same time.  One teammate needed some guidance in joining the call, as it was her first time using that platform, but it all worked out in the end. It was really refreshing to be able to put a face and a voice to a name, as so often in these courses we can feel isolated and anonymous.  It is also nice to embed some personality and vibrancy into an otherwise dry topic and methodical process. One immediate difficulty we ran into, however, was the slight time delay.  It was hard not to interrupt one another because there were no body cues or indicators that the person was finished speaking, and the split second delay kept making me second guess myself as to whose turn it was to speak.  I can get very uncomfortable with silence in a conversation, so it was in my nature to just dive in when I perceived a gap.  I can see how in a classroom a system such as raising hands or giving some sort of cue when you want to speak would be a necessary element in class management.

I was excited to learn something new from a classmate about working collaborative on the Google doc through Google Hangout.  I didn't know that feature existed.  It was helpful in not having to switch screens or manage multiple windows.  There is a LOT more I aim to learn about Google Hangouts when I get the next opportunity.

I am definitely glad we had the chance to meet up to solidify our final product, but I must admit I found that revision process particularly challenging.  Everyone has contributed what they already believe are good ideas, so it's naturally going to be awkward to eliminate or reword someone's contribution -- especially when you barely know each other.  Reaching consensus about a rather neutral topic such as netiquette was surprisingly difficult!  Everyone had their own ideas about organization and message priority and how to group ideas together.  We started editing the first two sections that way, talking through each bullet point and rationalizing it's existence and placement. It became an overly tedious process, so in the end, it took a leader to naturally emerge to "take over" to some degree. That teammate had some free time the following day to synthesize and consolidate the rest of our ideas.  That method appeared to be the most efficient and effective in the end.  Going forward, I can see how an initial conversation to get the gears turning might be necessary, but trying to meet in the final stages of a project in "refining mode" ends up feeling like too many cooks in the kitchen.  Divvying up roles more systematically or assigning certain subtopics to individuals might have been a more effective method.  Synchronous communication was just not my favorite method for creating a final product in the final stages.

Nevertheless, what we produced was an organized and coherent document. (See final draft.)  With this content we independently created asynchronous presentations about this topic.  I tried learning and creating my video with Adobe Presenter, but had some difficulty in the very final step.  In the end I resorted to using Screencast-o-matic to record audio to my Powerpoint presentation.  I then uploaded it to YouTube.  Here is the final result:



We also created a Scavenger Hunt to reinforce (and add to) the content of this presentation.  I targeted my activity for a middle school audience, and used Google Forms as the input portal for student responses.  Here is the website: http://fuhry-netiquette.weebly.com.  The questions link is found by selecting the button at the top of this webpage.

I am proud of the overall package I have created for my future students, and look forward to more opportunities to learn about online discussion tools and screencasting and/or telepresence programs.