ETC655: Instructor’s Notes: Reflections on Lesson 5 Discussions

Due to Thanksgiving holiday, the two posting periods do not apply to this week. By the end of the week, make sure you respond to all KEY questions and have 6 postings in total.

 

Due to the Assignment 3 Network Training Sessions, I noticed many of you were not as active and interactive as your normal performances.  I hope you will continue your good work in contributing to our network community. Three more weeks to go.

 

Community Development

It is not necessary that "High" is positive while "Low" is negative. Learn more on Community Development Indices

 

Overall, the community connections are positive and remains "Active" and "Interactive" from the previous lesson although it was not as interactive and interact. Two areas to improve are (RED Sections):

• Unique Edge (# of Connection) AND
• Graph Density (Connection Density).

 

Green: Positive; Yellow: Neutral; Red: Negative

	Lesson 5	From Lesson 4 to 5
Unique Edges # of connections Higher; better.	Medium| Neutral	Increase | Positiive
Reciprocated Vertex Pair Ratio Two-way interaction Higher; better.	High|Positiive	Decrease | Negative
Maximum Geodesic Distance Longest distance to connect Lower; better.	Low|Positive	Unchanged| Positiive
Average Geodesic Distance Distance of connections to connect Lower; better.	Low|Positive	Increase|Negative
Graph Density Connection Density Higher; better.	Low|Negative	Decrease | Negative
Modularity Cross Clusters Connection Lower; better.	Low|Negative	Increase | Negative

 

 

 

*From Lesson 3 to 4, the community development indices remained almost no change; therefore, the lines are overlapped.

 

 

As usual, below are my reflections on each key discussion question to share with you and to advance your critical thinking and learning.

 

L5-KEY-1-ONLE Model-Instructor's Reflection

I hope you have better idea in how to design ONLE with PLE to enhance network learning.

 

I encourage you to apply ONLE model when you plan to design ONLE/PLE.  Ask yourself, what linkage(s) would be effective to support your teaching and design.

Remember, to reach effective network design, we do not need to apply ALL linkages.  We need to be able to choose the linkages that are relevant and effective to our teaching and design goals.

 

I create ONLE model as part of my 2014 book to help us to teach and to design network instructions. Feel free to share this model with other professionals.

 

Technology disrupts learning, and today, Web 2.0 learning environments are disrupting LMSs. Online learning proponents should reflect on the past and look to the future to establish effective online learning for the future. PLEs and ONLEs offer online learners the opportunity to learn by acting within a system they have helped create, using interaction with other students to accomplish their learning goals. Open network linkage design model skills are critical to establishing PLEs and ONLEs. Simply giving multiple Web 2.0 tools to learners and instructors does not result in effective PLE and ONLE. It is your responsibility as an educator to prepare and assist network learners in building social network linkage skills, so they are able to successfully achieve network learning.

 

As an educator, you have the opportunity to prepare and advance online learners to become network learners. The two are different. Network learners in ONLE do not just consume learning content; they create and edit learning content collaboratively with other network learners. Additionally, while creating and editing content collaboratively, network learners "aggregate," "mash up," and "remix" identified network learning content to generate a new set of content with their creative ideas to personalize their learning.

 

Higher education is currently transitioning from online learning to an ONLE. Online learners use their mental, distributed learning model to make sense of their "network" learning mental model. As a consequence, these learners do not comprehend the value that social network interaction with ONLE offers; rather, they see ONLE as just another online learning environment. These learners may not be able to comprehend how "online" interaction is related to ONLE's network interaction. If online learners cannot comprehend the values of ONLE's social interaction, it is challenging for them to learn how to be "network" learners, which requires more specific social interaction in cognitive interaction (creating, editing, remixing, and sharing social content) and social interaction (build and maintain digital and social identities).

 

In a Constructivist and Connectivist learning context, both teachers and students are learners. By integrating the open network linkage design model, and creating and co-creating ONLE with network learners to assist all network learners to build their PLEs, online instructors have an opportunity to advance themselves to network instructors.  Could this be the concept of "Open Pedagogy?"

 

L5-KEY-2-Environment-System-Instructor's Reflection

I really like many of you challenged yourselves with critical thinking on this topic.  This is not an easy topic at all.  Typically, we addressed it with one aspect.  I saw some of you approached from cost of technology, features of technology, and designs etc.

 

I think there are no correct, nor incorrect answers to understand environment and system.  The key point is whether you are able to examine them from multiple aspects to understand ONLE. I agree for personal uses, learning, and teaching that we have preferences. When we design ONLE for others, we may not have choices.  In addition, the teaching, and learning contexts are different from our own.  As educational technology leaders, we need to have wider understanding on ONLE rather than just our own preferences.

 

Typically, we distinguish environment from system from the cost of technology and features of technology.

 

I would like you to challenge yourselves with these questions:

 

Typically, we argue:

Systems cost more than environment &

LMS/CMS is for systems while open network technology is for environments.

Can argue:

Environments cost as much as or higher than systems?

Is it possible that we integrate LMS/CMS to create environments while integrate open network technology to create systems?

 

L5-KEY-3-RSS: Instructor's Reflection: Apply Different Frame

 

It is great to see many of your shared your insights with us on RSS.  We see some have experiences with RSS while some don't.  It is very common that we apply our existing frame to examine new technology.  It is likely that new technology may not meet our expectations. This could be we apply our existing frame to evaluate something different.  For example, applying personal computer frame to examine mobile devices.  Some may conclude mobile devices don't function as well as computers, because (long) typing on mobile devices is painful.  Could this be due to we apply computer frame to examine mobile devices?

We are used to look for information while with RSS, information comes to us.  For example, subscribing Nabble discussion's RSS feeds; therefore, the postings come to our PLE RSS feeds rather than we visit the discussion board.

What do you think?

L4-KEY-4-Accelerated-Instructor's Reflection: Design. Not about Content?!

We had active and interesting discussion on online accelerated learning. Many of you applied your "professional" knowledge to analyze it while some used personal experiences to reflect.  It is important for us to approach any discussion topic from both "professional" knowledge and personal experiences.  I like to remind us that it is more than "I like/dislike it" nor "It works or doesn't work for me." 

 

When it comes to "instructional design"

• You design the instructions for instructors, students, not for your own learning.
• You may design it and not teach it. This is very common in higher education.
• You may not be the content expert. You provide instructional design support to teachers and faculties who are the content experts.
• Online accelerated learning is a trend. It doesn't mean it is the best way to teach/learn. Personally, we may or may not like to learn or to teach this way.  However, we need to know how to design it to meet instructors', students', and institutions' needs.
• What learning theory, pedagogy/frameworks, and design models/constructs you may use to design for online accelerated learning?  Instructivist? Constructivist? Or Connectivist pedagogy?
• When there is so much content to cover in online accelerated instructions, would Connectivist pedagogy be more effective since George Siemen's Connectivism focuses on the ability of "connecting" to right people, and meaningful content with effective technologies.

 

While designing online accelerated instructions, educators focus on "content."

 

Content is critical but I think effective pedagogy is even more critical for online accelerated instructions rather than just seeing online accelerated instructions as convenience for completing courses faster.

 

While financial and marketing advantages for institutions are no-doubt involved in the origins of the implementation of the accelerated instructions, pedagogical rationale supporting the online accelerated instructions is ultimately critical to ensure students to have positive learning and educators preparing effective online instructions.

 

While designing online accelerated instructions, do we just press regular semester instructions into accelerated instructions? If we do this, are we just focusing on "content?"

 

What pedagogy is more effective for online accelerated instructions (Instructivist, Constructivist, or Connectivist)?

 

Do online accelerated instructions regular the learners' different skills, such as self-regulated learning skills?