Lesson 5: Instructor’s Notes: L4 Discussions Common Feedback
Q: Chih, I posted many responses and wonder my SNA performances was not as high as I wished, particularly Prominent Role (Eigenvector Centrality) and Prestigious Role (PageRank)?
A: The number of postings may not necessarily correlate with SNA performance. Three ways to improve:
- Apply Inquiry Learning Model
- Post responses early in each posting period
- Visit the board more than twice a week
- When asking questions to the class or the classmates, ask good and challenging questions to engage the classmates in critical and propounding thinking. Classmates more likely respond to your questions.
- Make sure to respond to the questions raised by classmates & me.
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. Two areas to improve are (RED Sections):
- Unique Edge (# of Connection) AND
- Graph Density (Connection Density).
Green: Positive; Yellow: Neutral; Red: Negative
| | Lesson 4 | From Lesson 3 to 4 |
| Unique Edges # of connections Higher; better. |
Medium| Neutral |
Unchanged| Positiive |
| Reciprocated Vertex Pair Ratio Two-way interaction Higher; better. |
High|Positiive |
Unchanged| Positiive |
| 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 |
Unchange|Positiive |
| Modularity Cross Clusters Connection Lower; better. |
Low|Positive |
Decrease | Positiive |
*From Lesson 3 to 4, the community development indices remained almost no change; therefore, the lines are overlapped.
Here are my reflections on each of key discussion topics.
L4-KEY-1-ML: Instructor's Reflection: Mobilizing Content
Thanks for the great insights on ML. I like that you apply additional literature to support your argument. More specific, I like that you apply different aspects to examine ML, such as devices/technology, content, and interaction aspects. You also brought an important learning psychology concept in distance learning, transactional distance: "The transactional distance-divide being the physical and psychological distance between the instructor and students present within online learning."
It is very important to examine ML from learning psychology aspect.
On mobilizing content, we know content tends to be for more formal learning. When we deliver content through mobile technology and context, there are a few questions perhaps we should ask us:
1. Because accessing the content outside of the traditional room, or indoor, the ML with mobile content would be more "informal." Agree or disagree.
2. If delivering mobile content is vital, what need to do is to put "all content" on mobile. Right way to do?
3. If putting everything on mobile, aren't we there already since almost all content is online currently.
These questions are not easy to answer but I would like you to continue challenging yourselves with these questions.
Wearable Technology & Quantified Self
Mobile learning is related to wearable technology and quantified self. Wearable technology frequently is seen related to quantify self and mobile learning. Quantified self is the phenomenon of consumers being able to closely track data that is relevant to technology users' daily activities through the use of advanced technology. Quantified Self is a notable trend not because it involves an unprecedented technology but because it gives us a glimpse of what our daily lives will be like in the near future, in which many of the emerging technologies — the mobile web, Learning Analytics, wearable technology, gaming — will come together in full bloom. How and can the quantified self-movement when applied to personal learning be as transformative as it has been when applied to personal health? After collecting the data and quantified the self, then what? Even we can visualize and analyze it. How and what can actually be able to understand how learning environment changes and to improve teaching and learning outcomes with what we discover – diagnose, moderate, modulate?
The intention of collecting comprehensive data to quantify self is plausible. Perhaps how and what we plan to use the data is even more critical. Frequently, the collected data is perceived as being mostly punitive. Perhaps more importantly, it's not used by the student at all. How can we develop systems to allow students to gather information on their learning and combine that information with other important factors of their lives? What if our educational progress became one more component to our quantified self?
How can educational institutions become more active in monitoring and collecting students' learning behavior, the success of an endeavor of that kind will depend on how well it creates and provides the sense of play to students for their willing participation.
The wearable technology with quantified self-movement is about people sharing what they learn about themselves for the greater good, but there is a vulnerability to exposing personal information. The serious concerns are about privacy and security. But how the data kept and shared at those systems are used and accessed should be made as transparent as possible. In addition, how about connecting wearable technology to qualified self, learning analytics, and mobile technologies?
I encourage us to continue to challenge ourselves with this question and connect different concepts to understand it.
QR Code
QR, another topic related mobile learning, is around us everywhere if we pay attention. QR often is integrated with mobile learning. Can we see QR is type of AR?! If we agree, QR is a bridge between reality and virtuality?
I encourage us to think how we can use QR integration to enhance other technologies, such as mobile technologies, RSS, or aggregation?
L4-KEY-2-Emersive Technology: Instructor's Reflection: Reality in Us; Virtual outside of Us
AR/VR probably is more foreign to many of us. Many may argue it is harder for us to integrate it into our design and teaching. In a way, it may be hard but it is critical for us to set good philosophy for AR.
Could we see AR is a bridge to collect reality and virtuality and to enhance reality?
One of my doctoral students made an interesting claim: Virtuality is not hard to understand while reality is harder to grasp. In fact, reality is "our" senses. We need to be mindful to senses everything around us. Everything is our mind is reality while everything outside of us is virtuality.
What do you think?
Additional Reading:
VR and AR: The Ethical Challenges Ahead
L4-KEY-3-App: Instructor's Reflection
I know many of us have never thought about designing mobile apps. I think it is very critical for educators to design them, regardless we may actually do it or not. By designing mobile apps to support our designs and teaching would support us to understand mobile learning differently. In addition, we may other potentials in mobile learning, particularly the tasks can be done with mobile apps and devices while non-mobile technology can't.
I really encourage you to design mobile apps. It is not as hard as you think.
If you would like to help ETC to design ETC mobile apps, please let me know.
L4-KEY-4-Gaming-Instructor's Reflections: Gaming Dynamics & Gaming Personalities
Gamification for learning and education is frequently perceived with a negative impact on learning because of the misconceptions of gaming, even gamification is different from serious gaming. It is undeniable that gaming engages players in interactions and possible changing behaviors. Educators should focus on the positive and effective digital game dynamics to support learning motivation, rather than using a game façade that relies on awarding points, badges or shooting enemies, aliens. Positive and effective gamification could enhance learning and engage learners in a more social and context-rich decision making for problem solving in learning tasks.
Have you heard about gaming personality? Have you thought about how gaming personality may relate to gamification behaviors?
The key to the design of effective gamification is to understand the learners' gaming personalities, preferences, or characteristics and the gamified instructional contexts within which they participate. It is vital to expand the scope of efforts beyond deploying game mechanics and dynamics with gaming preferences. Social and cultural contexts of learning must be understood to advance gamification for learning.
Here is one of ETC faculty's publications on Gamification to share with you:
Tu, C. H., Yen, C. J., Sujo-Montes, L., & Roberts, G. (2015). <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283004009_Gaming_personality_and_game_dynamics_in_online_discussion_instructions">Gaming personality and game dynamics in online discussion instructions</a>. Educational Media, International, 52(4), 1-18.
Comments
Post a Comment