Enhancing Learning Opportunities by Student Collaboration in Online Learning Community Denys M....
-
date post
18-Dec-2015 -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
2
Transcript of Enhancing Learning Opportunities by Student Collaboration in Online Learning Community Denys M....
Enhancing Learning Enhancing Learning Opportunities by Student Opportunities by Student
Collaboration in Collaboration in Online Learning CommunityOnline Learning Community
Denys M. Lupshenyuk & Clayton Tartt
The University of West Alabama
This project proposal is supported in part by a grant from the Edmund S. Muskie Graduate Fellowship Program, a program of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) of the United States
Department of State, administered by IREX (International Research & Exchanges Board).
February 25-27, 2007 Abu Dhabi, UAE
What is TIGC What is TIGC Project?Project?
Experiential Learning
Collaborative Learning
Reflective Learning
Action Learning
Supported Learning
Project NeedsProject Needs
• Students lack ICT literacy
• Teachers lack hands-on technology use
• Insufficiency of web resources on education
Project GoalsProject Goals• To enrich national educational experiences;
• To make pre-service teachers more open to using web-based technologies in classrooms;
• To give future teachers opportunity to experience problem-solving learning through on-line community;
• To develop reflective individuals willing to improve effectiveness of teaching around the world;
• To lay foundations of professional networking via on-line community of practice.
Project OrganizationProject Organization
• Project Working Group− Project director− Team facilitators− Knowledge leaders
• Preparatory Stage− Design of TIGC Project
framework− Selection of project participants − Diverse composition of project
teams− Development of instructional
package
• Learning agreement• Project syllabus• Study guide• Techtorials• Videopodcast about
project
Digital ResourcesDigital Resources
• Computer Equipment
• High-Speed Internet
• Community-based web application− Manila User Land
(Tapped In, My-ecoach)
Computer-Mediated Computer-Mediated CommunicationsCommunications
• Communications tools − Asynchronous tools
• Discussion Board• Email
− Synchronous tools• Text-based chat-room• Audio/video conferencing• Instant messaging
• Collaborative Technologies − Streaming multimedia− Blogging tools− Wiki-technology− File Sharing
TIGC Project TIGC Project ImplementationImplementation
Implementation Stage
IntroductionStage
Evaluation Stage
Community Evolvement
Project Implementation
Introduction StageIntroduction StageIntroduction StageIntroduction Stage
Period: 2 weeks
Activities:
(a) Team Icebreaking
(b) Opening web conference
(c) Skills development webinar
Problem-solving & Team-building skills
PowerPoint & Audio conferencing
Community Introduction:
• Chat, audio/video conferencing, IM
• Discussion board, webloging, podcasts
Clarification of project goals & tasks:
•Text-based chat or audio/video conferencing
Period: 2 weeks
Activities:
(a) Team Icebreaking
(b) Opening web conference
(c) Skills development webinar
Project Implementation
Introduction StageIntroduction Stage Implementation StageImplementation StageImplementation StageImplementation Stage
Period: 3 months
Activities:
(a) Inter-team online collaboration
(b) Skills development webinar
(c) Presentation
Collaborative research to develop action plan:
•Wiki-technology•CMC tools•Streaming multimedia
ICT literacy and research skills
•PowerPoint & Audio conferencing
Project Implementation
Introduction StageIntroduction StageImplementation StageImplementation Stage
Evaluation StageEvaluation StageEvaluation StageEvaluation Stage
Period: 2 weeks
Activities:
(a) Team Icebreaking
(b) Opening web conference
(c) Skills development webinar
Period: 3 months
Activities:
(a) Inter-team online collaboration
(b) Skills development webinar
Period: 2 weeks
Activities:
(a) Inter-team evaluation
(b) Online community debating
(c) Closing web conference
•Peer evaluation (CMC tools)
•Self-evaluation (web survey; weblogs)
Online discussion of
students’ end-products
Sharing experiences
(CMC tools)
Project Evaluation• By team members:
− Weekly reflective blogs− Peer assessment and peer review− Summative self-evaluations
• By team leaders:− Weekly evaluation of team work− Summative self-evaluations
• By facilitators: − Continuous observation of team interactions
• By knowledge leaders:− Measurement evaluation of the final product of
collaborative work and individual action plans
SummarySummary• TIGC is carried out between universities
located in different countries.
• It is delivered via an online learning community.
• The purpose is to develop action plans to resolve problems in technology integration.
• It provides hands-on experience with the latest web-based technology.
• It provides ongoing educational facilitation, informational and technological support.
References • Anderson, T., & Elloumi, F. (Eds.) (2004). Theory and practice of
online learning. Athabasca, AB, Canada: Athabasca University. Retrieved May 15, 2006, from http://www.cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/
• Appel, J. (2006, November 28). Report: Students struggle with information literacy. eSchool News Online. Retrieved November 28, 2006, from http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/
• Atkins, N., & Vasu, E. (2000). Measuring knowledge of technology usage and stages of concern about computing: A study of middle school teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 8(4), 279-302.
• Bentley, T. (2000). Facilitation. Gloucestershire, England
• Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. New York: Macmillan.
• Fried-Booth, D. L. (1986). Project work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Jaques, D. (2000). Learning in groups. London: Kogan Page.
• Kilpatrick, T. (1918, September). The project method. Teachers College Record, 19, 319–334.
• Kolb, D. (1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. New Jersey, USA: Prentice-Hall.
References (cont’d)• Legutke, M., & Thomas, H. (1997). Process and experience in the
language classroom. London and New York: Longman.
• McGill, I., & Beaty, L. (2000). Action learning: A practitioner's guide. Milton Park, UK: Routledge Falmer
• Nikolayenko, S. M. (2006). Освіта в інноваційному поступі суспільства. [Education as an innovative approach to society]. Education of Ukraine, 60-61(754). Retrieved October 15, 2006, from http://www.mon.gov.ua/
• Ribe, R., & Vidal, N. (1993). Project work: Step-by-step. Macmillan: Heinemann.
• Richardson, W. (2006). Blogs, wikis, podcasts, and other powerful web tools for classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Corwin Press.
• Rogers, A. (2002). Teaching adults. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.
• Rogers, C. (1983). Freedom to learn. Columbus, OH, USA: Merrill.
• Rowand, C. (2000). Teacher use of computers and the Internet in public schools (NCES 2000-090). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Centre for Education Statistics.
• Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in development. Newbury House.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.