Week 11: Problem Based Learning and Simulation Games

Amit Deshpande at http://www.amit-deshpande.com/2008/10/simulation-games-4-problem-based.html provides a nice concise distinction between problem-based learning and simulation game based learning. Amit's comments describe simulation game base learning as having problem based learning as a subset but then with characteristics of its own. What makes these approaches appropriate for learning is that they have attributes of constructivism - active, collaborative, and learner centered. The simulation game approach also has the instructor as a facilitator rather than a teacher. Also, where the problem based approach has self assessment at the end of a learning area, the game based approach gives the learner ongoing incentive to get higher scores through more study and reading. Games also have increasingly complex graphics and multimedia displays which aids visual learners. In addition, games usually have help capability, allowing the learner to solve problems encountered during the learning process without extensive help from the instructor. Finally, the games allow the learner to try different strategies and get immediate feedback of the results of those decisions.

Week 10: Learning Objects and Constructivism

Learning objects are an interesting approach by instructional designers to create flexible development environments for the creation of course materials. Using learning objects, the content for a course is made up of small pieces that can be reused, split apart into yet smaller pieces, put together into other larger pieces, and generally reorganized in any way that is needed for course creation. Teaching has shown me that students learn best when they are actively engaged in the learning process. When looking at learning objects, I wonder how they can be used to create a constructivist learning environment. According to Bannan-Ritland, Dabbagh, & Murphy (2001), in order for learning objects to support a constructivist learning environment, they must support the storing of learner-created content and allow for this content to be organized in a way that it can be searched for later use. Availablity of learner-created content allows learners to be involved in the creative process of learning.

Washabaugh (2003) tells us that learning can be divided into two general areas, that of knowledge development where the learner accumulates facts and information, and the area of understanding where the knowledge learned is used in ways that lead to an understanding of a problem and the issues involved in solving that problem. Learning objects seem to focus on the knowledge area and not on the understanding area. In order to support a constructivist learning environment, Washabaugh suggests learning objects engage the learner, provide interactivity, be student-centered, and be socially interactive providing collaboration and team work. Washabaugh sees these learning objects as being like computer games where learners make decisions and see the ramifications of their decisions.

Despite the flexible nature of small pieces that can be reorganzied, it seems that current learning objects provide a structure that is too rigid for student centered learning, focusing more on a teacher-led or computer-led approach based on a fixed plan. There is hope for a change to this with the focus moving to the creation and storing of learner content (which could be learning objects themselves), interactivity which includes team processes and collaboration, and the concept of games and decision processing.

References

Bannan-Ritland, B., Dabbagh, N., & Murphy, K. (2001). Learning object systems as constructivist learning environments: Related assumptions, theories and applications. In D. Wiley (Ed.), The Instructional Use of Learning Objects. Association of Educational Communications and Technology.

Washabaugh, M. (2003). Learning objects in a constructivist curriculum. Teaching With Technology Today, 9(6). Retrieved on November 16, 2008, from http://www.uwsa.edu/ttt/articles/washabaugh.htm

Week 12: Lessons Learned

Some of the lesssons I have learned in our Computer Technology and Multimedia course include the power of software that provides discussion forums, wiki's for collaboration, blogs for making student knowledge, research, and views available to all on the Internet, podcasts for making course information available, and synchronous communications through video conferencing for remote course capabilities.

Discussion forums have been a part of this course and have given hands-on experience with asynchronous communications. I have also gained experience with the use of wiki's and will have my students use these to create and coordinate various document creation exercises. I will also have students in other courses use blogs to make their views available to all on the Internet in order to perhaps get feedback from people outside the course. After having gained experience in creating a video presentation, I will finally get around to creating podcasts of my course content and make it availabe to students for review. I also hope to be involved in the creation of remote classrooms through the use of video conferencing to provide a synchronous environment for our students.

Week 12: Skype Comment

My experiences with skype have been very positive. I will use it next semester as a tool for students to collaborate on team design projects. Skype does not have a steep learning curve and is very intuitive in its use. A very efficient environment will be created by using a wiki to control the development of the design documents and using skype to discuss designs and changes to designs. Students in this course are adults who work full-time during the day and find it difficult to meet as a team face-to-face outside of the normal class meetings. Meeting on skype will solve this problem. The ability to bring multiple people into the conversation is a major plus.

Week 9: Stakeholder and Designer Effect on LMS Software

I have found that when designing a software system, the analysis phase is the most interesting. This phase of a development project is when the needs of all the stakeholders are determined. It is these needs that then determine the direction of the project, and ultimately what the final software system will look like. This sounds simple enough. What could possibly go wrong as long as we find and handle all of the needs? Well, sometimes the needs of the stakeholders conflict. For example, someone financing the project is more concerned about cost than the user who wants a capability that will make him more effective at his job. Then there is the security officer who wants to be certain that solid security is built into to software which may make user access more cumbersome. Ultimately, the find product becomes a compromise between all of the stakeholders needs.

I began to think about this again when I came across a blog by David Jones called “The dissonance gap in systems and LMS evaluations” at http://davidtjones.wordpress.com/2008/11/17/the-dissonance-gap-in-systems-and-lms-evaluations/. LMS stands for Learning Management System. In his blog entry he takes the stakeholder needs idea a step further in that he says that designers (all those involved in designing a system) are affected by their world view that has been created by their past experiences. This world view then will affect the design of the system. The “dissonance” or difference between what the software will support and how you want to use the software can have an effect on your ability to use the final software product effectively. The wider the gap, the less likely it is that you can effectively use the product. Blackboard is used as an example of how groups of users are restricted in some ways as to how they can be organized into discussion groups. This is an example of the “dissonance gap” created by the design (and the designers) between the Blackboard software and the users.

What can you do about it? First, determine how you expect to use the software. What are all of the scenarios that describe how it will be used? Then, does Blackboard, or whichever LMS software you are evaluating, support those scenarios. If not, can you work within its limitations, or do you need to look at another LMS product?

Week 8: Benefits of Wireless Technology in Higher Education

The use of mobile wireless technology in higher education generates questions regarding what advantages this new technology generates. Studies (Kim, Mims, & Holmes, 2006) talk about the efficiency and effectiveness in teaching and learning created by mobile technology. But what does this mean? Certainly we can be more mobile, but how does this benefit learning? First, mobile wireless technology lets us communicate more easily. This allows us to collaborate more easily with other students and with faculty. Discussing topics of study with others allows us to come in contact with other ways of viewing a problem and its possible solutions. The phrase “two heads are better than one” can be expanded through collaboration to “many heads are better than one”. This collaboration can be real time or asynchronously, whichever is more convenient at the time.

Second, creating documents in digital form allows us to transmit and share information more quickly. We can take notes online, create reports, and transmit this information to other students and faculty because it is not in hardcopy form. Third, students see the importance of time management as learning and other environments become more and more seamless. Fourth, there is faster access to information as much of it is online. We can even read books online. We have access to this information through a wireless device; we do not have to visit a library. And fifth, we can take courses completely online, saving travel time and simplifying scheduling. In addition, there are indirect benefits to wireless technologies. We can have Internet access in areas where wired technologies can not economically and otherwise provide access. Within classrooms and on campuses the lack of wiring allows more flexibility for meeting locations.

This technology is in its infancy. As the technology matures and we become more comfortable with it, we will find more uses for it and more benefits.

Kim, S. H., Mims, C., & Holmes, K. P. (2006). An introduction to current trends and benefits of mobile wireless technology use in higher education. AACE Journal, 14(1), 77-100.

Week 7: Aysnchronous or Synchronous Learning?

Matt Crosslin at http://www.edugeekjournal.com/blog.php?id=198 discusses a few advantages and disadvantages of asynchronous and synchronous online learning. He prefers asynchronous learning with which I happen to agree but I think he has taken his position too far. He states that video conferencing (synchronous) has no place in online learning. But then he states that it may appeal to some people. What I think he should have said is that everyone learns differently and some people prefer not only online synchronous lectures and presentations but may even prefer in-class face-to-face meetings. There is a need for all types of learning environments, not just one. Why can’t synchronous communication as well as synchronous be available?

Matt makes a couple of good points. He wants active learning. He wants to interact with other students. Certainly video conferencing tends to be mostly lecture format but it depends on the quality of the videoconferencing technology being used. I have seen some videoconferencing where you felt you were in the same room as the speaker and you could ask questions and get immediate answers. Here Matt contends that synchronous meetings tend to be short (1 or 2 hours) and there is not enough time to think about questions and form good answers. This may be true, but if you do have a question, you can get an answer right now. Matt also contends that some students dominate class time and others have to sit back quietly and asynchronous communication precludes this from happening. On this Matt is correct. A shy person tends to be more outgoing in an asynchronous mode. However, asynchronous communications can be lonely to some, and a shy person can be very lonely in an asynchronous environment.

The bottom line is that we are all different and all forms of communication and learning need to be available to all of us so that we can all learn effectively in our own ways.