Communicating Effectively

My assignment today is to blog about how I perceive a short message when it is delivered in an email versus over the phone and in person. The message states that a report is missing and that data from that report is needed. It requests an estimate about when the report can be ready, or more specifically, when the data that was to have been in the report could be provided. (“Communicating with stakeholders”)

Possibly because I have a minor learning disability, I did not perceive a difference in the message when it was delivered in different ways. I prefer email over the other forms of communication in this exercise, because I can get a general idea of the message at a glance, and I can re-read the details as needed for precision. I generally read everything this way, summarizing and outlining material on first glance, then going back for detail, the second time skimming over some paragraphs while focusing intently on others. I also prefer email because it presents the least interruption if I am in the midst of a project. Emails are often easier to handle quickly.

The voice mail example was my least favorite vehicle of delivery because I generally have to listen to voice mails repeatedly to catch all the details. Depending on the voice mail system, they can be tedious to use. Gathering the details from a voice mail can require replaying the message several times. I prefer a message I can interact with, like an email or a live person.

The last vehicle of delivery in the assignment was person-to-person. I have mixed feelings about person-to-person communication. One-on-one communication is effective for me, but I find formal meetings distracting and inefficient. If I need information from a meeting, I usually have to take additional time reviewing meeting notes and researching gaps in the notes to get the complete information I need.

References:

EDUC-6145-3 project management in education and training. (n.d.). Communicating with stakeholders: Blog assignment. Walden University. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4744643&Survey=1&47=6447422&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1&BrswrOK=1&PrevRef=http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn%3FCourseID%3D4744643%26Survey%3D1%2647%3D6447422%26ClientNodeID%3D984650%26coursenav%3D1&submit1=Continue

Learning from a Project “Post-mortem”

As a means to learning “best practices” on future projects, I have been assigned to write a project post-mortem about a personal or professional project that was not successful. (“Defining the scope of the project: Blog assignment”)

I decided to write about an instructional design project that I have discussed previously in this blog. The project actually went quite well, but it definitely had its rough spots. The need for the project became apparent when I decided to try using Facebook as a tool to give ESL students experience using English. The attempt to use Facebook failed because the students lacked the basic skills to use a computer. I created a seminar to teach basic computer skills to adult ESL students, with a focus on using computers for social networking. (Lloyd, 2010)

In his eBook “The Project Management Minimalist: Just Enough PM to Rock Your Projects,” (Greer, 2010) Michael Greer suggests conducting a project “post mortem” involving asking of team members to find out their opinions of the success of the project, and brining respondents together for a “lessons learned” meeting. Greer suggests general questions that are appropriate for a post mortem, and then suggests “phase-specific questions.” 

Below are my answers to some of Greer’s questions related to the seminar I created for my students:

The single most frustrating aspect of the project was the amount of material I wanted to cover, versus the time that was allowed to cover that material. In the future, I would plan a series of at least three seminars to cover the material I attempted to cover in one evening. However, the primary objective of giving students the confidence to continue to learn to use a computer was clearly achieved. Students who had never used computers previously, expressed the intent to purchase computers and to continue learning to use them on their own. The “hands on” activities that were planned to give students immediate experience using a computer worked well. Students who attended the seminar left with new skills that will benefit them for life. The discussion portion of the seminar was difficult to evaluate because discussions happened in Spanish, and I do not speak Spanish. The interpreter participated in the discussions and concluded the discussions by interpreting summary comments.

The planning of needs and feasibility tended to err on the side of providing too much material for a one-session seminar, however the material that was planned was necessary in order to accomplish the goals of the seminar. The only change I could recommend for the seminar would be to allow for more sessions in order to cover all of the material. I would not change the seminar content.

Original estimates of the time required to accomplish project goals were not realistic. The focus on physical skills effectively overcame much of the potential communication difficulty of an English-speaking teacher working with Spanish-speaking students. Materials were effectively translated, and although the language barrier hindered classroom discussion, the social learning aspects of the plan worked effectively with the use of a translator.

The time estimate was off because the educational diversity of participating students, and the effect of that diversity on the flow of classroom activities was not anticipated. Testing and timing of classroom activities was done with students who understood instructions, and were already familiar with using a computer. None of the actual students had ever used a computer. Some of the adult students had less than three years of education in their own language, while other students had some college-level training. More focus on knowing the students would have enabled more accurate planning of time required to complete the seminar.

References:

EDUC-6145-3 project management in education and training. (n.d.). Defining the scope of the project: Blog assignment. Walden University. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4744643&Survey=1&47=6447422&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1&BrswrOK=1&PrevRef=http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn%3FCourseID%3D4744643%26Survey%3D1%2647%3D6447422%26ClientNodeID%3D984650%26coursenav%3D1&submit1=Continue

Greer, M. (2010). The Project management minimalist: Juest enough PM to rock your projects (Laureate Education Ed ed.). michaelgreer.biz/?page id=636

Lloyd, David. (2010, June 26). Reflection on EIDT-6110 Advanced Instructional Design [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://rechargepoint.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2010-08-23T16:29:00-07:00&max-results=7

Reflection: The Future of Distance Learning

(Auld & Pantelidi, 1999)

At the conclusion of each course I am taking at Walden University, I am required to write a brief reflection on the course. This reflection is for the ”Distance Learning” class I just completed.

Reflecting on perceptions of distance learning in our society brings to mind an informal survey I recently took of friends on Facebook. I invited negative responses, but friends with negative attitudes are not likely to express them to me. On the other hand, I have friends who enjoy debating contrary opinions.

Respondents seemed to agree that the rigor and value of education, whether online or face-to-face, relates to the commitment and effort of the student more than it depends on how instruction is delivered. (Neuhauser, 2002) One respondent discussed the perceived rigor of online learning versus the perceived rigor of face-to-face learning, stating that both appear to be equivalent, but questioning whether online learning is as effective because of an assumed lack of student-teacher interaction. This assumed lack of interaction with online learning seemed to permeate the discussion. A couple of respondents made the point that physical contact between students and between student and teacher has social value that transcends its educational importance. There was also discussion that some subjects that require hands-on activity cannot be adequately taught online.

I agreed with respondents about the need for need for interaction with students. “Teaching" without interaction is really just self-study. Interaction is a necessary element of education, but the separation of distance and time that distinguishes distance learning allows for a level of learner involvement and direction that is rarely possible in a traditional face-to-face setting. (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009d)

Respondents felt instructor interaction and learner motivation are important features of learning in any format. Issues unrelated to education such as work schedules would be the primary reason a student should consider online education versus education offered in a face-to-face format. These opinions were consistent with principles discussed in our course text. (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009d)

The consensus of the discussion was that distance learning is more appropriate for some learners than for others and for some subjects than for others, however studies of self-identified visual, auditory, and tactile (hands-on) learners have shown no significant difference in success with online learning versus face-to-face learning. (Neuhauser, 2002)

What do you think the perceptions of distance learning will be in the future (in 5–10 years; 10–20 years)?

            Adult learners clearly benefit equally from distance education as from face-to-face education. The evidence concerning K-12 learners is not as abundant, nor is it as clearly established. (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones) It seems clear that an evolution toward more online and blended (face-to-face education supplemented with online learning resources) will be the continued trend in the near future. It is my expectation that the trend will be for more blended learning in earlier grades.

            It seems unlikely online learning will ever fully replace face-to-face learning, especially for early grades, and especially for the learning of “hands on” skills that require human contact, but I expect to see continued expansion of online and blended learning in most fields of study, especially in secondary education and beyond.

How can you as an instructional designer be a proponent for improving societal perceptions of distance learning?

            I believe in keeping a balanced view of the appropriate use of distance learning, realizing that no one format or vehicle of education is inherently superior to another. Distance learning certainly has a place in public education. I expect to see its expansion primarily in the area of blended learning supplements to classroom courses, and for the education of those who for numerous reasons cannot or choose not to participate in public school classroom education. (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009a)

How will you be a positive force for continuous improvement in the field of distance education?

            I believe it is important for people to understand that distance education is just as effective as face-to-face education in most scenarios, and that blended education has been demonstrated to be generally superior to either of the formats. (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones)

What are your thoughts on the future of using multimedia to enhance and deliver instructional content?

            It is my opinion that multimedia can enhance learning, but the “core” of a well-designed instructional plan depends on much more than multimedia. It depends on providing learners with the information and the context with which to construct their own understanding, individually, and as part of a group. Learning is enhanced when it involves social interaction, whether that interaction is real, or whether multimedia simulates that interaction. Different kinds of learners need different kinds of instruction, and multimedia can help provide this necessary variety, but it is not possible to meet the needs of every learner. Learners are ultimately responsible to construct their own understanding, using the resources that have been provided. Multimedia provides resources that can be more effective than text and images alone. (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009b)

Resources:

Auld, L, & Pantelidi, V. (1999). The virtual reality and education laboratory at east Carolina university. The Journal, 27(4), 48-55. Retrieved from http://thejournal.com/Articles/1999/11/01/The-Virtual-Reality-and-Education-Laboratory-at-East-Carolina-University.aspx

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010, September). Evaluation of Evidence-Based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development-U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf

Neuhauser, C. (2002). Learning style and effectiveness of online and Face-to-Face instruction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(2), 99-113. Retrieved from http://www.personal.psu.edu/khk122/woty/LearnerCharacteristics/Neuhauser%202002.pdf

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009a). Definitions, history and theories of distance education. In Teaching an learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009b). Foundations of distance education. In Teaching and learning ata distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009c). Teaching and distance education. In Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance learning (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009d). The student and distance education. In Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

DISTANCE LEARNING CONVERSION: BEST PRACTICES GUIDE

From time to time, various classes in the course I am taking at Walden University require me to write blog entries as a way to demonstrate my ability to apply what I am learning to a practical issue. In my current class,”Distance Learning,” I am required to write a best practices guide for converting existing face-to-face courses to a distance-learning or blended (face-to-face with distance learning elements) format.

Ideally, a distance learning course should be designed from the beginning as a distance learning course. Principles of sound instructional design require knowing the learner, knowing the learning environment, knowing the subject content, and planning instruction with all of these perspectives continuously in mind. If a course is to be effectively converted to a distance learning format or a blended format, the process must not ignore these perspectives. (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Susan, 2009)

Instructional development happens in cycles of Analysis, Design and Development, Implementation, and Evaluation. Conversion of a course from a face-to-face format to an online or blended format will require repeated iterations of these steps until the process is complete. It is not realistic to assume that an existing course can be effectively converted to a different presentation format without these proven design stages and adjustment. In each design step give consideration to:

• Continuously connect old learning with new using social interaction between learners and the facilitator.
• Triangulate on learning objectives with a variety of instructional media.
• Know the learner. Know the environment. Know the topic.
• Create a pleasant and professional learning environment.
• Use what works, not what’s new.
• Balance variety and economy.

(Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Susan, 2009)

Click here to see the full guide.

Reference:

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Susan, Z. (2009). Instructional design for distance education. In Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

The Impact of Open Courses

David J. Malan

From time to time, various classes in the course I am taking at Walden University require me to write blog entries as a way to demonstrate my ability to apply what I am learning to a practical issue. In my current class,”Distance Learning,” I am required to write an evaluation of an open course website, which provides access to a college-level course free of charge, but without credit. (“Designing for Distance Learning: Part I - Application”)

Several options were offered for this week’s evaluation (verbatum):

• Massachusetts Institute of Technology Open Course: A free and open educational resource for educators, students, and self-learners around the world.http://ocw.mit.edu/index.html
• Stanford on iTunes U: A public site that includes courses and faculty lectures.http://itunes.stanford.edu/
• Open Yale Courses: A free open website offering a number of introductory courses taught by Yale University professors. http://oyc.yale.edu/
• Open Culture http://www.openculture.com/

(“Designing for Distance Learning: Part I – Resources”)

I looked over all of the options that were offered, and I found a number of the courses interesting. However, since I recently audited an open course online, I felt better prepared to write about the course I audited, “Building Dynamic Websites.” (Malan, 2009)

The course consisted of two one-hour video lectures over 12 weeks, with downloadable slides, three project assignments, and a Google discussion group (http://groups.google.com/group/cs75-discuss) for asynchronous discussion. This course can be taken free as an open course, or it may be taken as a graded distance learning course for credit through Harvard Exension School  (http://www.extension.harvard.edu/register/).

I found the course beneficial, but I deviated from the course activities quite a bit. I did not do any of the projects. I did read about the projects and I “lurked” in the Google discussion area. Because of the way I interacted with the course, I felt like an outsider (because I was an outsider). I watched some of the videos with other members of my family and I discussed ideas from the videos with them. I viewed the course videos in iTunes, taking notes, and stopping and starting the videos frequently as I looked up resources or tried out various ideas using the “try it yourself  editor” at http://www.w3schools.com/.  I found the combination of lecture videos and the hands-on activites from w3schools to be an effective way for me to update my own web-development skills.

Probably the most important benefit I gained from the course was an introduction to various open-source development and troubleshooting tools that were referenced in the course. During the course, I set up  my own website with which I could experiment with ideas in a “live” environment. My website (www.1loyd.com) was created as I tried out ideas discussed in these lecture videos.

I would have to say this course, while well-designed for a lecture hall, appears to have been developed as a standard face-to-face course. The syllabus was well-designed. It laid out the course schedule, resources, and learning objectives in a way that made it easy for learners to take charge of their own learning. Lectures at Harvard Hall were recorded and distributed online with downloadable notes, slides, and source code. However, offering this course online appears to have been an afterthought. No provision, other than the Google discussion group, was made for online learner evaluation and feedback from the instructor. It does not appear the course was altered in any way for use by distance learners, other than the addition of the Google discussion group, which certainly would have been a positive supplement for face-to-face learners, but was poorly implemented as a distance learning tool, because it was provided as a supplement, and not as a central part of the course. Two-way discussion providing learner feedback is a central feature of distance learning, especially in the absense of any other kind of formative evaluation. (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Susan, 2009)

The material in this course could be easily refactored as an online course. Much of the extraneous classroom discussion could occur in a dedicated classroom discussion forum. Video segments from lectures could be used in a series of videos, however those video clips should be very short, each introduced to the viewer an intimate studeo format. The clips should be three to ten minutes in length, (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009) and the total time for all lectures should be 20 to 30 minutes per week.

References:

EDUC-6135-2 Distance learning. (n.d.). Designing for Distance Learning: Part I - Application. Walden University. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4603379&Survey=1&47=6447422&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1&BrswrOK=1&PrevRef=http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn%3FCourseID%3D4603379%26Survey%3D1%2647%3D6447422%26ClientNodeID%3D984650%26coursenav%3D1&submit1=Continue

EDUC-6135-2 Distance learning. (n.d.). Designing for Distance Learning: Part I – Resources. Walden University. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4603379&Survey=1&47=6447422&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1&BrswrOK=1&PrevRef=http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn%3FCourseID%3D4603379%26Survey%3D1%2647%3D6447422%26ClientNodeID%3D984650%26coursenav%3D1&submit1=Continue

Malan, D. J. (2009). Computer science E-75: Building dynamic websites. Harvard Extension School. Retrieved from  http://cs75.tv/2009/fall/#l=lectures&r=about&v=lectures/0/lecture0

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Susan, Z. (2009). Instructional design for distance education. In Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

SELECTING DISTANCE LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES

From time to time, various classes in the course I am taking at Walden University require me to write blog entries as a way to demonstrate my ability to apply what I am learning to a practical issue. In my current class,”Distance Learning,” I am required to blog about what distance learning tools I might use to solve a hypothetical problem using a distance-learning technology. In the scenario I am solving, a new colaborative information-sharing system was introduced for the purpose of providing a means for staff in a mult-location corporation to participate in ongoing collaboration, sharing screen captures and documents. (“Distance learning technologies: Application”)

The goal of this exercise is to identify the distance learning technologies that might provide the best solution to the challenge. Unfortunately, the hypothetical scenario provides no information about the system that learners will eventually use for their collaborative projects, nor was any information given regarding the number of people involed in the training. These factors would affect the decision on what kind of technology is best suited to the project.

Since the training is for managers, I assume there will be a small number people around a conference room table at each location. Since the goal of the training is to empower learners to collaborate, I believe the solution must include using the new technology in a collaborative manner.

I believe I would begin by using a two-way videoconferencing technology (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009, pp. 101-103) to acquaint users with the technology they will be using. I would schedule six individual meetings, one at each regional office. Before the meetings, pre-learning surveys would be emailed  to each participant to be returned prior to training to help guide which topics may need emphasis and possible pre-training.

I would use remote control software such as the open-source  “UltraVNC” (“Remote control for all,” 2008) to operate a remote computer screen running the actual collaboration software as users become aquainted with it. The computer running the collaboration software would be in the conference room with the learners. The instructor would have remote control of the machine and would see the same display. I would use a telephone or voice over IP (VOIP) connection (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, p. 153) for two-way discussions between the instructor and the small group of distant learners.

After providing users with an overview of the product, I would assign groups of learners with collaborative projects to explore advanced aspects of using the software. Learners would use the colloborative software to work together to create their own supplements to the software documentation.

A follow-up set of teleconference meetings would provide for face-to-face discussion of learner experiences with the new collaboration software.

Finally, learners would be asked to post a reflection of their experience in the seminar to the collaborative learning system, and post-learning surveys would be sent to each learner to gain insight into the perceived effectiveness of the training and to solicit suggestions for ways to improve continued training.

References:

EDUC-6135-2 Distance learning. (n.d.). Distance learning technologies: Application. Walden University. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4603379&Survey=1&47=6447422&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1&BrswrOK=1&PrevRef=http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn%3FCourseID%3D4603379%26Survey%3D1%2647%3D6447422%26ClientNodeID%3D984650%26coursenav%3D1&submit1=Continue

Remote control for all. (2008). UltraVNC. Retrieved from http://www.uvnc.com/

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Technologies for distance education. In Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Beall, J. (2007). Videoconference Meeting. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.0/deed.en. Retreived from http://www.flickr.com/photos/denverjeffrey/710112391/

Defining Distance Learning

Walden University is actually not my first experience with distance learning, although distance learning has changed so much since I first experienced it that it seems entirely different.

The way we define distance learning seems to change with the technologies that make distance learning possible. Michael Simonson defines distance learning in terms of a teacher and a student, separated by time and space. Absense of a teacher defines what Simonson terms “self-study at a distance.” (Simonson) 

I don’t agree with Dr.Simonson, because I think any kind of social-learning element disqualifies the “self study” label, as illustrated by my crude illustration (top left) of a T.A.R.D.I.S. (meaning time and relative dimensions in space). (Rose, 2005) 


As a high school student I participated in a Moody Correspondence School course that defined my understanding of distance learning until very recently. The course required a facilitator and regular face-to-face discussions with other students.

The course consisted of twelve chapters assigned over twelve consecutive weeks. Each chapter had required text to read, and a formative evaluation at the end of each chapter with a discussion preparation assignment. Each week, students would meet together for discussion conducted by the facilitator. Grades were issued based on discussion participation and periodic quizzes.

My next experience with distance learning happened about ten years later. I had a vision to build a business around helping young couples just starting their families to begin a disciplined program of saving and investing. I did not intend to profit directly from the investment business, but rather I intended to market various financial services that would supplement a core of long-term savings and investments.

As part of my strategy, I purchased a distance-learning package to teach me how to become a licensed securities broker. The courses I purchased involved books to study, tapes to play, quizzes to complete and mail in, and finally I had to go to a testing center in Chicago to be tested using a Plato terminal. When I went to take my tests, other people were also at the facility taking various other kinds of tests.

Several years later, as a home-schooling parent, I purchased a rather expensive service for my son’s education. The system consisted of a set of multimedia CD-Rom’s with reading assignments, videos, puzzles, games and quizzes. The service also came with a crude three-way text messaging system between my son, myself, and an online instructor. Most of the text messages from my son involved discussing technical problems with the software, responses from a teacher who obviously felt my son was making excuses, and emails from me explaining the technical problems were real, and required repairs.

In following years, we upgraded our computer equipment and internet service, and purchased a similar service from the same company that cost less, and allowed me to directly monitor my son’s school work from a distance. This arrangement allowed me to view the same screens my son saw, and to clear and reset and override grades when the software failed to recognize correct responses.

Later we purchased an Algebra course on video tape. Each day our children would play a ten-minute taped presentation, and then do a set of exercises, much as would happen in a classroom, but without the interaction of a classroom. This plan worked well with my son, but it was not nearlly as successful when I tried it with my daughters. In hind-sight I realize the plan failed because people learn best in a social setting.

Now that I am taking classes at Walden University, I have a broader perspective of what distance learning can and should be. Each class consists of a variety of learning experiences including assigned reading of textbook chapters, journal articles, and various multimedia presentations. Some of the presentations are interactive. All classes involve asynchronous discussions in which students write a summation applying what they have learned from the assigned materials, and discussing their ideas with other students, providing encouragement, asking questions, and answering questions.

Having experienced traditional lecture-halls with assigned reading and student study groups, I can say my experience at Walden has been just as rigorous, as traditional lecture-hall methods, but my actual learning defined by my ability to use what I have learned is significantly better with the structure I am currently experiencing.

My definition of distance learning is instruction that involves social interaction involving a separation of time and space between those involved in the educational interaction. 

References:

Simonson, Michael. (n.d.). Distance education: The next generation [Video file]. mym.cdn.laureate-media.com/Walden/EDUC/6135/11/downloads/WAL_EDUC6135_01_A_EN-DL.zip 

Rose. (2005). Doctor Who [Television episode] Writer Russell T. Davies, Director Keith Boak, Producer Phil Collinson. BBC, Cardiff.