This Sounds Familiar …

Have you ever done a Google search on a topic and clicked on a variety of links that take you to various blog posts – all with the same article – virtually word for word? I’ve encountered this situation many times. As a former copy writer, I’m always a little stymied that businesses are willing to be so unoriginal. Don’t they know that they lose integrity with the public?

Now imagine this scenario in an online classroom. Students have a huge resource for information. Sometimes that resource must seem tempting. Why give thought or credit to someone else’s ideas when you can just as easily steal them. Again, it’s all about integrity.

Fortunately, there are some tools that assist with the prevention or detection of plagiarism. Three tools that will assist with detecting and preventing plagiarism are:

1. Plagium. Copy and paste the questionable text into a search box. This is a great free of charge service, although participants must register to use it. The only downside, each search is limited to 250 characters.
2. Turnitin. This is one of the cornerstones of online academic integrity. Turnitin will compare the student’s work to a vast collection of information – 24+ billion web pages, 300+ million student papers, and over 110,000 publications.
3. Dupli Checker. Another great checker. Dupli Checker also operates in the “copy and paste” mode, but also displays the website with copied content and delivers an analysis report upon conclusion.

If you are interested in finding more resources to battle against plagiarism, check out this article at Educational Technology and Mobile Learning (http://www.educatorstechnology.com/2013/06/top-8-plagiarism-detector-tools-for.html).

At this point, I believe it’s essential that instructors rely on plagiarism detectors for written communications within an online course. The ability to access information readily, combined with the perceived “distance” in distance education makes it much easier to cheat. Some students simply don’t feel accountable to an instructor they’ve never met or seen.

Assessments are one method of testing students on their skills or knowledge gained in the classroom. Of course, an online assessment can easily become an open-book test. It’s almost impossible to keep students from relying on other resources when completing assessments. But maybe the student gains knowledge from looking up the materials for the assessment.

Ultimately, the internet is once again that great tool that continues to spin out of control. Unfortunately, there’s only so much we can do as instructors or instructional designers to combat it.

 

 

Old School vs. New School

(Week 5 application, part 2)

Okay, I admit it. I’m a little bit old. I remember when multimedia in the classroom meant showing a film (using a projector) or showing slides, with an accompanying CD or tape playing music in the background.

Now it’s possible to create a truly multimedia experience – to create a presentation that actually incorporates audio, video, presentation slides all in one file. But guess what? That’s old school too.

Technology and multimedia provides a new face to the old training model. Suddenly we can reach more students across the globe, students can engage when it works best for them, we can encourage students to share their real-life experiences, and to grow and learn from one another. As stated by Cairncross et al, the learning process can be enhanced through the integration of multimedia. It allows users to have control over the delivery of information and interactivity (Cairncross et al, 2001).

Caincross et al also states that multimedia allows for multiple representations of information in a variety of formats. This repetition creates what they describe as an Authentic Learning Environment (Cairncross et al, 2001). One example of an authentic learning environment in online instruction is a course that combines:

1. An interactive learning module based on course curriculum.
2. Implementation of the content of the module in online course.
3. Use of blogs or wikis to document learner’s process and engagement within the course.

At my work, we often use two of the above components – an interactive learning module (in Captivate), and implementation of the course in an online environment, such as a class Webex. What we seem to be missing is the important element of learner engagement.

Why stop without fully engaging all students? Part of it is the twin demons of usability and accessibility. After all, we are engaging learners all over the globe. Many without the benefits of consistent internet connectivity. There’s also a huge cultural process to address. Many of our learners are simply more comfortable in a traditional face-to-face classroom environment.

I’m excited about the rapidly changing face of technology and multimedia and what it means for our learners. Sometimes it takes a while for organizations to catch up to technology, sometimes it takes a while for learners to catch up. Eventually, I believe we will all be working together in an online learning environment that is truly an authentic learning environment, with students engaged and actively participating. Of course, by then technology will have made another huge leap, and we will once again be playing catch up!

Resources:

Boettcher, J. V., & Conrad, R. (2010). The online teaching survival guide: Simple and practical pedagogical tips. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Cairncross, S. and Mannon, M. (2001). Interactive Multimedia and Learning: Realizing the Benefits.

Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 38(2), 156-164(9).

Conrad, R., & Donaldson, J. A. (2011). Engaging the online learner: Activities and resources for creative instruction (Updated ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Behind the Curtain of Online Learning

Week 3 Application Post

 

A few months ago, I set up a mock class to meet the requirements for one of my Walden University courses. I’d been using Blackboard Learn for over a year, and assumed I had a failry good understanding of the features and uses of the software application. It seemed only logical to use Blackboard Learn to set up a course site for my mock class.

There’s a big difference between setting up a class and particpating in a class. I soon disocvered that while I had an understanding of how to navigate within the Blackboard course site, I was clueless when it come to setting up class files, linking documents, making sure all the class links worked, putting announcements in the right place, etc.

In our course text, The Online Teaching Survival Guide, Boettcher states “part of the instructor’s responsibilities it to take action to ensure that all learners are engage, present and participating” (Boettcher et al, 2011, p. 52). While this sounds like a straight-forward task, without an understanding of the technology, it’s almost impossible to create an environment that will engage the learners. As I was preparing for this mock class, I kept feeling a bit like the Wizard of Oz – I didn’t want learners to look behind the curtain, or discover all I didn’t know.

I think a well constructed site, with an easy to use interface, may not merit any comments from students. But when students encounter difficulties, or find links that won’t work, their frustration level understandably rises. Given that one of the goals within the online community is to establish a presence – social, cognitive, teaching and community (Boettcher et al, 2011), these kinds of errors present a road block for the class.

It’s essential to have a well thought out plan for developing a course online. However, just as important to developing the course content is an understanding of the technology tools used for the online course.  The next time I set up a class, I’ll spend much more time understanding the behind the scenes (or curtain) environment. I think it makes all the difference for the learners.

Resources:

Boettcher, J. V., & Conrad, R. (2010). The online teaching survival guide: Simple and practical pedagogical tips. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

 Conrad, R., & Donaldson, J. A. (2011). Engaging the online learner: Activities and resources for creative instruction (Updated ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

 

Welcome back to the Blogosphere!

I’m once again blogging as part of my course assignments for my Master’s program at Walden University.  This term my course is Online Instructional Strategies.

This week we look at one of the more fascinating elements of online instruction – the development of an online community. To be perfectly honest, I really hadn’t given this component of online instruction a great deal of thought.  I’m very impressed by the course materials that have helped to illustrate the importance of the learning community.

Much of my focus has been on the content of the educational experience. As Weigel states “Content is the clay of knowledge construction; learning takes place when it is fashioned into something meaningful.” (Weigel, 2002).

Learning communities allow for critical analysis, personal interpretation of knowledge, an opportunity to construct knowledge from experience.

Learning communities are composed of three elements:

• People – The learners, facilitators or instructors, and administrators
• Purpose – The reason for the community, as an example a discussion group to offers an opportunity to discuss course content.
• Process – How do the learners and instructors interact within the learning community?

Learning communities allow learners to engage in a collaborative learning process by sharing multiple perspectives. Learners that participate within a learning community demonstrate and increased self-directedness and successful learning.

As stated earlier, the responsibility within the learning community is evenly distributed among the learners, instructors and administrators. The instructor and administrators help build an environment for a learning community. The instructor engages the learners to create a community where there is an expectation of participation, and ensures that participation is encouraged and valued.

I’m really looking forward to learning more about building online communities. I’m intrigued by the difference an online community can make to the learning process.

Resources:

Boettcher, J. V., & Conrad, R. (2010). The online teaching survival guide: Simple and practical pedagogical tips. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Conrad, R., & Donaldson, J. A. (2011). Engaging the online learner: Activities and resources for creative instruction (Updated ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Saba, F. (n.d.) Evaluation Distance Learning Theory. Lecture presented for Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved from class.waldenu.edu

Stead, D., Kelly, L. (2013) Enhancing Primary Science: Developing Effective Cross-Curricular Links. New York: Open University Press. Retrieved from: learn.moodle.net

 

Creepy Scope Creep

Scope Creep: The natural tendency of the client, as well as project team members, to try to improve the project’s output as the project progresses. Portny et al, 2008, p. 346.

It’s hard to imagine a project that hasn’t fallen under the spell of scope creep. It always starts out as an easy process, define the project, create a statement of work, and get to it. The reality is that the client or stakeholders keep coming back with additions, changes, deletions – you name it.

I’ve experienced scope creep on almost every project I’ve worked with. The project I’m currently working on, an expense management software implementation, is certainly no exception. This project is already daunting. We are rolling out a new software process and have to train thousands of employees on the new system. This project already has a very aggressive schedule – just a few months before rolling out the software to the pilot groups, then additional training for the rest of the employees.

A few months ago, several managers decided that we needed to add a new pilot group to our process. And, best of all, we had to push up the pilot for this group by four months and accomplish the pilot over the summer. Not only did this effect the training schedule, but also the configuration of the software, the implementation of the software, etc. Of course, this wasn’t included in the initial budget process, so there are no funds for additional training.

Our team went into both panic and production mode. We made several requests to rethink the addition of this pilot group, but to no avail. Eventually, we had to redirect resources to develop training and production for this pilot.

While it was an incredibly challenging and stressful experience, there were some positives. We were able to produce some quality training, and that training provided a foundation that we hadn’t considered using in the initial project. We also learned a great deal about managing our people resources, and the stresses placed upon them. While this phase of the project was especially stressful, it provided valuable information for the next phase, which will be equally challenging and fast-paced. We learned how to better establish expectations for training in a global environment.

There are always positive and negatives with any project, but I think the most important lesson to learn from this process is to respect the staffing resources. In retrospect, I believe it’s important to be willing to discuss the original project scope and the deliverables and make an effort to eliminate the dreaded scope creep. While I think it’s great to have a “can-do” attitude, a project manager sometimes has to be the one person to negotiate or enforce the original scope. It’s not easy to be the enforcer, but sometimes that’s what the project manager needs to do.

 

Resources:

Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008).Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc

Budgets and Estimates — The sticking point in Instructional Design

This week, our Project Management course focuses on budgeting and allocating resources throughout a project cycle. As part of this process, we are looking at the specifics of allocating resources for the instructional design process.

I find this to be an interesting process. There are so many different components of instructional design and because there are so many different opinions about how to budget for the process.  A few months, I was researching the average cost to develop an eLearning module. In performing a routine search I found lots of discussion among Instructional Designers, with wildly varying opinions of the costs of eLearning development.

In researching this week’s assignments, I found a couple of great resources which are listed below.

The first is an article about estimating costs and time in instructional design. I like this article because it examines a lot of different factors in creation of instructional design materials, and also gives some figures on estimating budget for these processes. Best of all, information in included on how these figures were gathered – such as how the hourly rate for instructional design is calculated.

Please check out the following link:

http://sas.byu.edu/training/documents/EstimatingCostsandTimeinInstructionalDesign.pdf

In researching estimating time, I found another article/blog that refers specifically to calculating the time to develop eLearning. This article contains several links to other articles on estimating the time it takes to develop and produce eLearning. It’s really interesting to be able to compare and contrast different methods for estimating the same process. I think ultimately, we end up taking all the information and creating a method that works best for our individual organizations.

For information on budgeting for eLearning and the development cycle, please refer to this link:

http://theelearningcoach.com/elearning_design/isd/time-to-develop-online-learning/

Finally, I found another great resource on project allocation and estimations. There really is a science to estimation. This article illustrates some of the methods for developing better project estimates with greater accuracy. I think it’s valuable to review the process. For more information, check out this link:

http://www.learncentrix.com/estimating-instructional-design

Resources – time and money – are valuable. It’s hard to find a way to accurately estimate the use of these resources, especially when a project is large. The above resources offer a good starting point for analyzing and budgeting.

Ring, Ring — It’s your turn.

Remember the game of telephone? You pass along a message to the person next to you, each person relays the message to their nearest neighbor and when the message meets the last person, you compare the end message to the starting message. Generally, the message has become convoluted through the various interpretations.

This week, my blog assignment is all about communication and interpretation of messages through the use of different communication modalities – email, voicemail, and face-to-face communication. As Portny et al state “..project manager should plan and prepare so their messages are received and correctly interpreted by the project audiences” (Portny et al, 2008, p. 367). This week, we focus on the responsibility of communicating effectively.

Email

As one would expect, we rely on auditory and facial cues to interpret messages. When relying solely on an email message, the reader assigns emotion, urgency and intent to the message based simply on the written words. I found some of the email confusing in regards to deadlines. Because I was focusing on how the message could be interpreted, I was reading the email with a somewhat jaundiced eye, looking for possible sarcasm or confusion.

Voicemail

Hearing the same message clarified some of the points substantially. The use of voice inflection and natural pauses in speech helped to clarify the message. Many of question I had, or the perceptions changed by hearing the neutral tone of voice.

Face-to-face

As I watched the video simulation of the face-to-face communication, my perception of the message changed very little. The facial expressions of the person speaking certainly helped clarify the message, or at least the intent of the speaker.

While each level of communication helped clarify the message by adding inflection, emotion, and intent, I think that most people are accustomed to using a variety of communication methods for relaying a message. While it’s easy to misinterpret an email message, I think many people have trained themselves to take a moment and pause, to reflect on what the message actually says, rather than our possible interpretations. Of course, I’ve had many instances of misinterpreting an email, but it’s essential to ask for clarification.

In a perfect world, there would be no misinterpretation of messages. We’d all take the time to make sure we deliver face-to-face communication, so that our messages are clear. But the reality is that part of the responsibility of a project manager is to keep the project on focus, meeting deadlines – and that requires adapting communication methods for expediency.

A good project manager is also responsible for keeping the project moving forward – which may mean translating or clarifying communication among team members. There are numerous methods for delivering messages, but the most important aspect in project management is to communicate to the stakeholders and project participants. Lack of communication is far more dangerous to a project than having to review a message and seek clarification. It can make drive a project to failure.

Resources:

Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008).Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

ID Project Post-Mortem

I was recently involved in a project at work for release of a new software system to employees. This project was unusual from the beginning and fraught with problems.  In this blog, I’ll review the project and discuss some of the lessons learned and how this could be addressed/corrected in the future.

This project involved introducing a new timekeeping software to our organization. We were moving from an entirely paper-based processing system to an online tracking system for exempt and non-exempt employees. The project is being rolled out as a pilot to a smaller group of employees with a release to all employees within two months of the project date. So, let the project autopsy begin:

Let me preface this by saying that our team was not involved in any initial meetings with the vendor, vendor selection, or review of the software. The focus on this project was that we were the training deliverers, and they’d let us know when they needed training – very much a hands-off approach (despite our pleas to be involved earlier.)

As I said, our team was not involved in the selection of the vendor, or the review of the product. This very much affected our project deliverables. The internal client relied on the software vendor to offer their ideas of training. Of course, the vendors preferred training approach would be that the vendor provide the training. Failing that option, the vendor suggested training methods that had been used by other clients. Again, we weren’t involved in this stage.

The training deliverables and schedules were developed by the vendor and the stakeholders. Our team was brought in about 3 weeks prior to pilot group training. We were tasked with making training materials to distribute during class, and provide the initial training to the pilot group. After the pilot training, all future roll-out training would be performed by the project stakeholders (not trainers).

Of course, the biggest issues with this project revolves around the lack of involvement in the planning phase and the training deliverables. Throughout the entire process, our team was running in place trying to get materials produced with a ticking clock next to us.

What would I do differently?

1. I would have requested earlier involvement in the process, preferably as the product was being reviewed to gain better understanding.
2. Ideally, our department should have been involved in the creation of the training plan and schedule.
3. I would prefer to have an opportunity to do some kind of needs assessment and tailor materials to that, rather than be handed a product developed by someone else.
4. Our group should be involved in future training, so we can continue to improve the process.

I hope that everyone in our group has learned an important lesson about the process. This definitely was a project where the stakeholders defined the project and the project scope.  Of course, memories fade after a while. Hopefully, we won’t have to re-educate team members in the project development phase in the future.  

Up Hill Climb For Distance Education

I believe distance education has been on an uphill climb to change the public perception about the quality of distance learning. Fortunately, I think that distance learning is just about to crest the mountain.

 

More professionals are embracing distance education; it’s becoming an essential educational tool in corporate training. It is a tool that is fairly new given the true scope of time. Yes it does have its skeptics, within K12 education community, higher education and corporate training. Skepticism is an essential part of the quality and improvement process. Skepticism forces us to answer our critics by employing acceptance standards, using best practices in instructional design, and continuing course evaluation. (Siemens, n.d).

 

As a resident of Washington state, I’ve seen some amazing technical innovations. But I’ll admit (somewhat shamefully) to an early belief that the internet wasn’t going to be all that great, that a company like Amazon which did not release dividends back to investors was probably not going to be there for the long haul. Clearly, my technological insight is lacking. I find it difficult to address the issue of where will distance learning be in 5, 10, 15 or 20 years, in part because of the meteoric growth and changes to the industry. It’s obvious that the tools that were available ten years ago to instructional designers (email, video and audio conferences) have changed  dramatically in the last 5 years (Web 2.0 tools, serious games, etc.) (Nash, 2005). We will certainly be using more mobile apps as training tools, and increasingly sophisticated gaming/simulation software

 

A number of factors have been suggested as a method for improving perceptions towards distance learning. Clear professional practices have been discussed earlier and by Leven & Wadmany, (2006). Another factor to explore is the quality of the web-based tools used in distance education and the focus of the educational experience as a learner-led instructional environment. (Shain & Shelly, 2008).

 

Some of my peers have expressed a feeling of dismissal when they mention they are working towards a degree with an emphasis in online learning. I’ve found that I have the exact opposite reaction, at least within the professional community. Most of my peers faces light up and the general perception is “good for you.” Ultimately, I think it comes down to familiarity with distance learning. Those that have some exposure to it are more likely to have a positive impression. Those that haven’t experienced it need time and experience to validate or change their perception.

 

As I commented in my weekly discussion, perception of distance learning can be changed most effectively through internal stakeholders. I was pleased to see the acceptance rate of college presidents to distance learning — found 51% of college presidents stating that online courses provide the same value as traditional environments.  (Allen & Seaman, 2010). Slowly but surely the perceptions of distance learning are changing, as rapidly as the tools used to create distance learning evolves. I plan to be an active participant and use strong instructional design principles to be part of the process.

 

Resources

 

Allen,E. & Seaman, J. (2010). Class Differences: Online Education in the United States. 2010; Babson Survey Research Group: Sloan Consortium.

 

Educational Technology & Society, 11(3), 216–223.Siemens, G. (n.d.).  The future of distance education [online video].  Retrieved August 18, 2013 from http:/waldenu.edu

 

Levin, T., & Wadmany, R. (2006). Listening to students’ voices on learning with information technologies in a rich technology-based classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34 (3), 281-317.

 

Nash, Susan, S. (2005) Learning objects, learning object repositories and learning theory: Preliminary best practices for online courses. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects. (1), 217-228.

 

Sahin, I., & Shelley, M. (2008). Considering Students’ Perceptions: The Distance Education Student Satisfaction Model. Educational Technology & Society, 11(3), 216–223.

 

Love is in the Air ….

My Distance Education class at Walden is discussing the following scenario for this week’s assignment:

A training manager has been frustrated with the quality of communication among trainees in his face-to-face training sessions and wants to try something new. With his supervisor’s permission, the trainer plans to convert all current training modules to a blended learning format, which would provide trainees and trainers the opportunity to interact with each other and learn the material in both a face-to-face and online environment. In addition, he is considering putting all of his training materials on a server so that the trainees have access to resources and assignments at all times.

Our assignment is to reflect on this scenario and offer some suggestions.

The part of this scenario that caught my attention was the statement “…the trainer plans to convert all current training modules to a blended learning format.” This statement is an indicator of what happens all too often in training and HR – someone falls in love with a training strategy and decides everything must change, to incorporate this new strategy. I’ve worked in organizations that decreed All training will be…on-the-job training, self-paced training, use a wacky set of adult learning multiple intelligences, etc. To me, these decrees make as much sense as saying “All training will be conducted on bucking broncos” or “All learners will wear Star Trek t-shirts.” There is no one-fit answer to all training.

But, that’s the challenge instructional designers face, trying to balance the “let’s change everything” directives with the needs of the learners and the training objectives. And just for clarity, I like blended learning. Some of my best friends are blended-learning designers.

Given this situation, what factors should be considered when changing training programs? Again, I’m such a concrete literal thinker that I’m a bit stymied by the scenario. There’s not a lot of information. So I’m going to “Kobayashi Maru” the scenario a bit (Google it). I’m going to apply details from a training course that my organization is currently using and contemplating changing to blended learning. I’ll still try to use the information from the original scenario, but with just a bit more detail:

This training is held annually in Thailand and covers 5 days. The participants are upper level finance staff from various national offices. The training is scenario based with presentations by executive staff throughout the week. These executive staff members also play the role of SMEs for answering questions during the scenarios.

So, back to the scenario analysis – our focus in the scenario(s) is on:

• What pre-planning strategies need to be considered?
• What aspect of the original training could be enhanced in the distance learning format?
• How will his role, as trainer change?
• What steps are needed to encourage online leaners to communicate with other learners online?

A blended learning program combines online and face-to-face delivery, with 30% to 79% of the content delivered online (Allen & Seaman, 2010). In the article The Sloan-C Pillars and Boundary Objects in Framework for Evaluating Blended Learning, (Laumakis et al, 2008) discusses the Sloan-C Pillar and Boundary Object approach to evaluating the effectiveness of blended learning. While I’m not sure it’s ever smart to work backwards in instructional design, I do think these five pillars provide excellent criteria for evaluating whether the blended-learning strategy is appropriate, or at least elements to consider in the development of the program. The five pillars are:

1)     learning effectiveness

2)     access

3)     cost effectiveness

4)     student satisfaction

5)     faculty satisfaction.

I’m going to use a table to detail the strategies and analysis. I realize that this blog is already long, so I’m attaching the table in a PDF.  Evaluation blended

I do believe that blended learning is an exciting method of training. I think any shift from an Instructor-Centered Model to a Learning-Centered Model is a good thing. However “teaching with technology requires a new set of skills for most educators and learners.” (Simonson et al, 2012. p. 142). I think that this type of change needs to be carefully considered and evaluated by instructional designers and training professionals to make sure that educators and learners are ready for the move. Don’t pick a strategy and then try to make the learning work.

Resources:

Allen, I. & Seaman, I. (2007). Making the grade: Online education in the United States. 2006; Midwestern edition. Wellesley, MA: Sloan Consortium.

Bonk, C. J., & Cunningham, D. J. (1998). Searching for learner-centered, constructivist, and socio-cultural components of collaborative educational learning tools. In C. J. Bonk & K. S. King

George, T. & Mcgee, M. K. Educational Advantage. Information Week, March 10, 2003, pp. 57-58.

Laumakis M., Graham C., Dziuban, C., (2008). The Sloan-C pillars and boundary objects as a framework for evaluating blended learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks. 13(1) pp.75-87

Naaj, M., Nachouki, M., Ankit A.,(2012) Evaluating student satisfaction with blended learning in a gender-segregated environment. Journal of Information Technology Education. 11. pp. 185-200.

Napier, N., Dekhane S., Smith, S., (2011). Transitioning to blended learning: understanding student and faculty perceptions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks. 15(1).pp. 20-32.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2012). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (5th Ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.