05.18.07
Posted in General, Conferences at 5:46 am by Norm Garrett
I was presenting at a conference the other day (the Faculty Summer Institute at the University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign) and all of my preparation and planning was foiled by some simple settings. When I arrived at the location (30 minutes early as is my usual practice) and connected my laptop, I couldn’t get the projector to take the input from my computer. After fiddling around with settings, etc., for 30 minutes or so, I decided to cut my losses on that and go to backup plan #1. Backup Plan #1 was my flash drive. Unfortunately, as is NOT my usual practice, I had neglected to copy my PowerPoint slides to the flash drive ahead of time. For whatever reason, I now could not get my computer to recognize my flash drive. Time for Backup Plan #2.
Backup Plan #2 was to use the Internet-connected computer in the room to access a web page I had set up with the html version of my PowerPoint slides. At first, I used Firefox as the browser to view the slides, only to find out that the html version of the presentation (created directly from PowerPoint) wasn’t totally compatible with Firefox. One of the participants in the session, who was following along on her computer, mentioned that she was viewing it fine in IE. So I switched to IE and we finished the session.
In Hawaii last fall I had to resort to Backup Plan #3, which was speaking from the printed handout. We had an earthquake that killed the power on Oahu for almost 24 hours and we were presenting without electricity. That experience made me very grateful for the backup plans.
My suggestion? Always have multiple levels of safety nets:
- Ask for the conference to supply a computer even if you intend to use your laptop
- Always have your flash drive with you and always have it loaded with your presentation and other materials you might need
- Have hard copies of handouts and even your slide presentation
A good presentation isn’t about the materials or the slides. It’s about the content. But you can get so frustrated by technical problems that you lose site of that and technical problems can kill your presentation. The same is true in the classroom. While technology is often viewed as a way to save time and effort, it often turns out that using it is more work. There certainly is risk involved. In the end its use can pay off, but don’t walk the tightrope without a safety net (or two).
Permalink
03.23.07
Posted in Blended Learning, Learning Theory, Learning Styles at 3:01 pm by Norm Garrett
We need to adapt. I know many professors who can’t see that the students that are coming into their classes are different than those of, say, 20 years ago. First of all, these students don’t much like books and rarely use them. Second of all, they want learning to be more “pull” than “push.” But we can’t just throw technology at them. In the first place, they aren’t all necessarily fond of it and, secondly, does the technology fit the pedagogy? Further, does the professor know anything about (or have any comfort level with) the technology?
Here’s a great article from The Chronicle of Higher Education about implementing some Web 2.0 practices in our classrooms. Personally, I am a great fan of social networking in the classroom. Accordingly, I use RSS feeds, blogs, wikis, and forums extensively in my classes, both face-to-face and distance learning. But not everyone is comfortable with that. Still, everyone needs to learn to adapt and there are some good ideas here about doing so.
Permalink
Posted in General at 10:25 am by Norm Garrett
Online courses have taken off, but are they all good? They range from PowerPoint slides without narration (i.e. “read the chapter and look at the PowerPoints”) all the way to sophisticated courses that use a variety of technologies, foster a great deal of interaction, and have actual learning taking place! How can you tell where your course falls?
A good place to start the evaluation is using a tool that was developed at the Illinois Online Network. It is called the Quality Online Course Initiative and it was two years in development, taking the best of many other instruments that are out there and placing everything into one easy-to-use rubric. The rubric framework makes it straightforward to use to evaluate a course.
If you are just starting out developing online courses, I would highly recommend that you look at the rubric before and during the development process.
Permalink
03.09.07
Posted in Conferences at 11:17 pm by Norm Garrett
The Illinois Online Conference was a great success. Here are some observations:
- The live Elluminate sessions were great. There was a lot of interaction between participants. Even in the concurrent sessions there were at least 20 participants, at least in the sessions I attended.
- It was interesting how many international participants we had this year. Just those I met included Australia, Argentina, and Germnay. Isn’t it amazing how an online format can flatten the world?
- Topics were varied and addressed just about every aspect of online and distance learning.
- There were many web poster sessions to visit in addition to the live sessions. In addition, there were quite a few recorded (podcast and vodcast) presentations that were excellent.
In all, it was a fun and productive conference. One thing it did was make me want to hook up with some of the participants in person just to have a bull session. That’s one thing that’s missing from a real conference: The ability to go out for dinner and continue talking things over. Maybe we’ll figure out how to do that remotely too. The virtual dinner would be a great addition to next year’s conference.
Permalink
02.10.07
Posted in Conferences at 12:25 pm by Norm Garrett
If you want to participate in a conference that is rich in ideas for online learning but flexible and easy to attend, try out the Illinois Online Conference. There are both synchronous and asynchronous sessions and a wealth of information and ideas about online learning.
If you are interested in registering for the conference, which is to be held on February 14-16, go to the conference website. For a sample web poster session for the conference, try out my IOC 2007 page.
Permalink
02.04.07
Posted in Conferences, Web 2.0, Learning Theory at 12:39 pm by Norm Garrett
For the past couple of years, I have spent most of my research time and travel funds presenting webiners, conference sessions, and workshops on network theory and learning communities. In a nutshell, my philosophy is that social networking can be leveraged by teachers to supplement “traditional” instruction. In order to do this, the social network in a classroom has to be jump-started. That’s where technology comes in. Blogs, wikis, forums, podcasts, and the like can be used to fertilize a learning community that has natural roots to begin with. Even though I present and speak on this all the time, I haven’t (to date) posted a blog entry about it.
In higher education it is even more critical for the instructor to push-start the community, since the community isn’t as naturally formed as it might be in a group that meets 5 hours a week (high school) or even 30 hours a week (elementary school). 150 minutes per week isn’t, under normal circumstances, enough time for a community to sprout and begin to grow. Accordingly, if the instructor isn’t actively involved in fertilizing the community, it will not sprout, or sprout and quickly die.
The results of this are clearly seen when we apply network theory. Network theory tells us that in a class of 30 we have a potential 870 connections (the formula is n(n-1)). Chances are, if the collaborative network is not allowed to grow, we have only 29 connections (the teacher to all 29 students). Consider the difference that takes place when even a portion of the potential network connections are used by students in peer-to-peer interaction: A geometric increase in connections.
As an example, I have created a network diagram of a class in which there are 19 students and a teacher. Very few of the students interact. In a second example, each of the 19 students has a relationship with approximately half of the other students (a relationship would be incoming, i.e. the student gains information, or content, from the other student). Take a look at the second network diagram and then consider the amount of learning that is likely taking place in the second network versus the first. The instructor is still the central connection, but the addition of dozens of additional network connections augments the content, varies the type of learning (appealing to different learning styles), and results in a more dynamic and richer learning environment.
I am finishing work on a website for the Illinois Online Conference 2007, which takes place on Feb. 14th and 15th. Here is a link to the site if you want a preview.
Permalink
01.16.07
Posted in Society and Technology at 4:05 pm by Norm Garrett
Over the past week or so I have moved this blog from a server at my house to one of my servers at my web host (1and1.com). My server at home is primarily a test platform I use for research and programming. Originally, I had put the blog on that server when I was first playing around with it. Then the blog turned into a real thing. So, after more than a year on my server, I took it off and copied it to the new site.
I had been putting this off because I knew it would take some time and might be problematic getting the blog and the accompanying database copied over without losing anything. In the end, it wasn’t too hard and only took about an hour altogether.
Upon reflection, I was reluctant to do it mostly because I was so comfortable with how it worked. It never caused problems and changing the location (and upgrading the WordPress software, which I also did when I moved it) seemed like a real pain for no gain. To the consumer of the blog, it doesn’t work any differently now than it did before. It dawned on me that this is the way we likely view many technology changes. If there is no appreciable gain demonstrated, why go to the trouble (and expense) of doing it? Why, for example, should I move to Windows Vista when XP works fine for me? I used to change just stay on the cutting edge, but after countless hours of wasted time fixing things that weren’t broken, I’ve sort of changed my attitude.
It would seem that many teachers are in the same boat. They are so comfortable with what they do that they really can’t see any reason to change anything. Moreover, they see detriments, not benefits, from adopting some technologies that are often touted. Those of us who are zealots for instructional technology need to step back for a moment and put ourselves in their shoes. If we can’t show tangible, palpable benefits from the technologies we espouse, how can we expect anyone to take the risk of change? Anecdotal evidence is not enough. We need some hardcore research concerning the efficacy of many of these technologies and we need it yesterday.
Permalink
12.30.06
Posted in Tools at 9:03 pm by Norm Garrett
I am testing out Windows Live Writer, a free Microsoft tool for posting entries to blogs. Instead of logging onto the blog itself, and then going through the normal editing process, Windows Live Writer is a client that you download to your computer. You create your posting in WLW and then upload it to your blog. Since all of my blogs (including this one) use WordPress, WLW fits nicely with it, as it is preconfigured to work with it (and many other) blogging packages and sites.
The nice thing about WLW is that it is WYSIWYG all the way. It will do all your html formatting behind the scenes, but upload the html file just as if you had edited it directly in your blog. I’ll post more about it here as I put it through its paces (it is currently in beta), but if you are interested in trying it out, go to the Microsoft site.
Other things are also easy to do. For example, numbering, bullets, and block quotes are done with WYSIWYG simplicity just by choosing tools from the toolbar. If you are used to MS Word and other Microsoft software, this couldn’t be easier, and sure beats trying to make things look right by entering your own tags.
Best of all, the software is free and will continue to be so.
Kudos to Microsoft on this one.
Permalink
11.15.06
Posted in General, Blended Learning, Society and Technology at 10:34 pm by Norm Garrett
Last month I put 20,000 miles on my frequent flyer tally, mostly going to conferences and workshops about educational technology. Having attended many of these conferences over the past 6 or 7 years, I have these observations:
- Educators and policymakers are doing all they can to make the current paradigm work. The bad news is that it’s the paradigm itself that is outdated. We are using an early 20th century model in a 21st century environment. Believe me, I know. I have been in this system since 1953 (going on 54 years), which is about 50% of the current paradigm’s life. Think about it. High schools and our current setup have been around since the early 20th century … the last time we underwent any kind of paradigm shift.
- In my thinking, no amount of fixing, tweaking, updating, or streamlining of the current model will work. Again, it’s the model that’s wrong, not the way we are implementing it.
- While I have been developing some possible ideas that might be included in a new paradigm, my basic question is how you design and implement a completely new paradigm. Where does the process start? Is it a bottom-up or top-down process (does it begin with teachers in the classroom or with educational policymakers?)?
- There are certainly many hard-working people out there who are trying to change things. The problem is that they are trying to change things within the context of the current paradigm. Again, this is a paradigm that can’t be fixed. To answer my own question, I don’t think a paradigm shift will be a bottom-up process. Does that mean it’s useless to try? Not at all. Where will the new paradigm come from if we don’t experiment with new ideas within the current one? But it’s not enough. We need to rethink everything from funding to curriculum. That provides the paradigm, the framework within which we operate. Changing things by beginning with instruction (the only thing most of the ed-tech zealots have any control over) is simply not enough to cause a paradigm shift by itself. However, demonstrating completely new models of instruction might provide some impetus for those at the top to begin to look at wholesale changes.
What’s wrong with the current paradigm? I don’t have enough room here, but here are some ideas off the top of my head. Note that these are fundamental flaws of the system and cannot be fixed within the context of that system:
- The academic calendar - Why do we still use an agricultural model for an academic calendar that dates back 150 years? Last time I looked, none of my students were needed in the fields during the summer.
- The curriculum - We target mediocrity. Just ask any students who are high achievers and they will tell you how bored they are. We are NOT targeting our best and brightest, nor are we doing a real service to the slower learners. The system is tuned for the average. The outliers are not well served.
- Fixed Depth - I call this Static Depth Instruction. The course parameters dictate the amount of depth and breadth in a course, not the needs or achivements of the students in the course. What we should use is a Dynamic Depth Instruction model wherein students are dynamically given the depth they want/need, determined as they move through the course. There should be no limits on the depth that could be achieved by a student in a given amount of time.
- Curricular Breadth - Students who attend relatively small high schools are given few choices. Even if they attend large high schools, there are severe limitations to the number of choices available to them. Customized, or matched curriculum is impossible. We are limited by space. It’s like the system is a giant bricks & mortar business that can’t seem to figure out how to use technology to augment its offerings with a virtual curriculum.
- Funding - Our funding mechanisms are anachronistic.
- Administration - The days of the local school board should be over. We are a global society, and our educational system should reflect that. Parochial interests do not serve the system well.
I could go on about this, and will in future postings. There are a lot of hard-working early adopters out there that are grabbing onto technology and enhancing their teaching with it, mostly on their own time and without much in the way of accolades or funding. In fact, many of them reap the disdain of their late majority and laggard colleagues for pushing forward and trying to improve instruction. They know the system is broken and are doing everything they can to start a bottom-up movement to change it. Unfortunately, we are talking here about needing a white knight to show up and get something done at the top. That white knight might be the disruptive technology of the world marketplace and the paradigm shift it will force. How long will we have to wait for that and might we react to late to save our competitive position in the world? Only time will tell.
Permalink
10.16.06
Posted in General, Conferences at 5:30 pm by Norm Garrett
I am in Hawaii, having survived yesterdays earthquake, and had some observations I shared with my graduate students. Here is the posting from their class blog:
I had mentioned in class that I would be gone most of this week presenting a paper at a conference. The conference is ELearn 2006, an international conference on ELearning, held this year here in Hawaii. I arrived late Thursday and my presentation was yesterday. At 7 yesterday morning, local time, we had a 6.5 magnitude earthquake. My room is on the 14th floor and it was a wild ride for about 10-15 seconds. Of course, before going to bed the night before I watched a Discovery Channel documentary on the 2004 tsunami and so the first thing that entered my mind, since our hotel is right on the beach at Waikiki, was that. There turned out to be no tsumani because of the depth of the quake (about 12 miles down), but had there been one, it would have arrived here only 20 minutes after the quake. Power went out and was out for over 14 hours before finally being restored about 9:30 last night. By the way, I did give my presentation, but without electricity. Our meeting rooms here have large windows that open, as all face the sea. We opened all the windows, had plenty of natural light and a nice sea breeze, and went ahead with the conference sessions (without, of course, our computers, PowerPoint slides, etc.). I think it turned out OK, though, because the sessions were more informal, allowed for more interaction, and weren’t tied to the canned presentations as much. When it became dark and the power had still not returned, the hotel issued us all light sticks (like kids use on Halloween). They worked fine and we got by.
I wanted to comment on a few observations I had with regard to technology and our dependence upon it. These are small examples that happened here:
- One of the biggest problems at the airport was the toilets. The autoflush systems need power to operate and there is no manual flush backup. Nobody at the airport could use them, and people were stuck there all day (of course, we didn’t know about any of this at the time, since we didn’t have power … I read it in the Honolulu paper this morning)
- Cell phones worked sporadically on auxiliary power, so I got all my news by calling my wife in Illinois, having her look at CNN.com on the Internet, and report to me what was happening here! She wanted to know what was going on, but we were clueless here because we had no communications (TV, Internet, etc.) except cell phones. So she told me what was going on around me because I had no way of finding out.
- When you lack communication with the outside world, you become a community of your own, operating independently of that outside world. Most all of the guests in this hotel (which is a considerable number … it is 25 floors with hundreds of rooms) stayed here, since venturing out was dangerous (no traffic lights since all power on the island was out). Many rumours flew around with no way to verify any of them unless you could get through on a cell call. Without cell phones, it’s hard to say how we would have found out anything. People talked, made friends with total strangers, and just sat around and relaxed. It was really something you don’t see much of any more under normal circumstances.
- People are very resilient and can adapt quickly to unforseen and unanticipated situations.
- We have a great reliance on technology. If it weren’t for the disaster preparedness plan that this hotel has, things would have been a lot worse. They broke out supplies of water, food, and kept us fed all day even though there was no supply coming from the outside into the hotel. They had auxiliary power and knew exactly which things to keep powered and which to shut down. We had lighting in the emergency stairwells and all hallways, but all other lights were off. They kept the ice machines in their kitchens powered so they would have ice for us, and minimal power to be able to cook. They also powered their refrigerators and food stores so that they could provide us with food, having no idea how long the power would be out, as well as the speaker system when they needed to talk to us. They had the supply of light sticks to give us so that we could navigate in our rooms after dark and their employees were well-trained on what to do, moving right into disaster mode without missing a beat. The employees had battery-powered lanterns to cook and work by and they had really planned ahead for this contingency. So while we didn’t have elevators, Internet, radio, or TV, we got along fine as a group and got through it all unscathed.
Today, everything is pretty much back to normal, but a few hours without technology was, actually, quite refreshing. I wouldn’t recommend the earthquake to anyone, but getting away from technology for awhile is good for the psyche.
See you next Monday.
Dr. Garrett
Permalink
« Previous entries ·
