Week 6 Discussion Summary

This week, we were split into smaller groups of 5 people. Each person posted what they thought the most significant quote from the week's reading was. Then everyone in the group posted a short response to that, and finally the original poster had a final say on their own quote. It was an interesting way to run a discussion, although it seemed difficult to say everything on a topic in 50 or 100 words though and really come to a big conclusion on anything. It also seemed hard to advance the topic with such a restriction on the word and post limit. Our group talked about things such as developing a strong framework, using examples, spending more time on doing activities, using games, and deciding how much blending of classroom and eLearning there should be for a course.

My most valuable contribution was my initial post on the quote I found most significant:

“Many lectures have too much theory and not enough concrete, specific, realistic examples. Remember, not everyone can reason from general concepts to particular applications, or at least not without the help of examples that they can understand and apply.” (Horton, p. 64)

"This part of the lesson centered around using examples in eLearning. When the instructor cannot see the student’s response during the course or lesson (where the student’s face or questions can convey lack of understanding), it is important to have included many examples designed to make sure the concepts can be understood and applied. Having more examples might help make up for the lack of direct interaction between students or with the instructor by giving the student more concrete evidence on which to base their learning instead of trying to draw from theory alone."

I feel this was my best contribution because it introduced an idea that is very important to consider when designing eLearning, something that must be kept in mind. It is something that will be useful in our Web Conference coming up. Being able to give good examples will help people understand the topic and be able to discuss it better. Using examples helps people understand topics and be able to apply them to their lives. In the discussion that ensued we came to the conclusion that the examples needed to be valid and realistic to be effective. Otherwise, they may come across as a waste of time to the learner.

I am looking forward to the future discussions, since I found it a little hard to do a lot of in depth focus on this one. I will have to consider more the usefulness of this type of discussion as compared to other methods.

Week 5 Discussion Summary

Our discussion this week centered around the question of whether or not we can remain true to our instructional values if we have student-content, student-student, or student-instructor interaction. We began the week with an Xcel spreadsheet listing the instructional values on one axis and the types of interaction on the other so we could see which types of activities would match up with both the values and interactions. Early in the discussion we came to the consensus that we needed variety in order to cover all the values. Then we moved on to talk in more detail about keeping the social aspect as part of the learning. This including different ways that students could obtain the social aspect even if they were not working with other students in a classroom.

My best contribution to the discussion was a response to Joni’s question about whether we could be true to our values if we had student-student, student-content, or student-instructor interaction. My response was,

“I think we can still be true to our values, but maybe not meet all of them in one particular activity. Over the length of a course we could still be true to the values because there is time for all 3 different types of interaction, such as we have experienced in this class so far. But if we used only one type such as student-content for a whole course, I don't think that we could stick to all the values. I do think the same is true for learning in a classroom too though. It is best when there is a good variety.”

I feel this was my best contribution because it got to the heart of the question and applied to my teaching in a classroom and eLearning. As an instructor this is something that I need to work on in my classes every day. It is important to keep a variety of activities to meet different instructional values in different ways so as to utilize as many as possible over the length of a course. We all need to keep this in mind as we learn how to develop eLearning because the values are still an essential part of the learning. This is definitely something to keep in mind as we go forward with this class and the rest of the eLearning program.

Discussion Summary from Week 4

The discussion for Week 4 began with our group questioning the difference between philosophies and theories. It seemed a little unclear in our reading, but I feel that as a group we did a good job of coming up with good definitions and a basis for our discussion. After that it became more about whether anyone has to teach using a different philosophy while teaching or if we ever change our philosophies or adjust the class design to fit our personal beliefs. And finally we were discussing the use of new technology in schools, such as ipods and cell phones, for learning purposes. There was some interesting insight as to whether one’s philosophies changed or if one particular person may have a philosophy that is made up of a blend of different ideas that may not necessarily coincide with what our text has categorized.

My best contribution to the discussion was a post answering Jodi’s question of, “Does anyone have an experience where you intentionally chose a strategy for instruction that contradicts your philosophy of teaching/learning? If so, what happened?” I answered with an example about a class I am teaching for a colleague who uses a different style. In order to keep the class consistent for all of the students, I try to use the same techniques he does. I think this was my best contribution because it was a personal example used to answer the question of another classmate. And it helped segue the discussion into the next part, about whether we ever have to change our philosophies. In the example I used, I did not change my philosophy but structure my teaching towards someone else’s philosophy. This may be necessary in certain situations one may come across this conflict in designing eLearning, having to choose to teach to someone else’s philosophies or adjusting one’s own to complete the goals of the education.

I feel like another important part of my contribution was the answering of one question and asking another to keep the discussion moving. It did not generate many responses in the same thread, but I still feel like asking new questions helps us keep thinking about the topic and generate further insights together. This week’s discussion was very interesting and a good one to be involved in as it seemed to be setting up the framework for our learning about designing eLearning.

First Blog

Life is full of firsts. I have not used a blog before, so this is a new experience for me. I have read blogs before, so I have some idea of how the process works. I am looking forward to using this method to share my thoughts and ideas on the discussions we have in the eLearning classes.