With all the discussion about Social Networking, specifically Facebook and Twitter, how do you keep your interactions and information sharing professional?
The stories about new college graduates’ Facebook pages coming back to haunt them in their job search, is a topic that we as professionals also need to pay attention to. How much sharing is too much? What are the “rules” or etiquette we need to follow? That’s the focus of a PC World article I recently read.
A primary point in the article focuses on the question of “what type of interaction are you using the media for?” Is it for personal connections or professional? There are different ways that you handle how and what you share depending on to whom you are sharing. Think about your face-to-face interactions. Do you share the same kinds of info with professional colleagues that you do with your friends and family? Hopefully, the response is a vehement “No!” If not, you may want to rethink that practice… I just saying!
The article walks you through setting up your privacy profile within Facebook and specifics on etiquette to consider. Who should you friend? How often do you update your information? How many friends? Remember it is not a competition but a vehicle for interaction.
Twitter etiquette is also discussed. Some of the strongest messages in the article are found in the disaster scenarios. Do you really want to tweet your every thought or move? Remember Twitter is more open than Facebook. Anyone can choose to follow your tweets unless you choose to protect your updates.
Like any online tool, social networking can be amazing, allowing us to connect in ways we never imagined. To make this type of media work for us, it’s worth the time to think through the process of our interactions and reasons for connecting.
Social media is online content created by people using highly accessible and scalable publishing technologies. At its most basic sense, social media is a shift in how people discover, read and share news, information and content. It’s a fusion of sociology and technology, transforming monologues (one to many) into dialogues (many to many) and is the democratization of information, transforming people from content readers into publishers.
Mmm...ice cream!
Traditional broadcast media concentrates content publishing in big organizations—TV stations, newspapers, textbook publishers. It used to be that the tools were so expensive and required so much expertise that you had to keep it centralized with those big organizations. Now tools for creating content are easy, usually requiring very little specialized technical knowledge or training. But if everyone just created content and posted it, it still wouldn’t really be social; it would be broadcast on a smaller scale. The “social” part of the media is also in the comments, ratings, and conversations now possible.
For a great metaphor on social media and how it differs from traditional media, check out the Common Craft video “Social Media in Plain English.” Instead of media, this talks about ice cream. This is the story of how the town of Scoopville has a great Big Ice Cream company and what happens when everyone gets their own ice cream machines and can make unique flavors at home.
This month our blog posts will focus on social media, sharing some of the different tools and different ways social media can be used for learning. We’ve written a number of posts related to this topic previously. Grab some ice cream to cool off from the summer heat, take a look at some of the posts below, and be social—leave us a comment!
Even though she’s been teaching for nearly 40 years, Sue Brien has not slowed down one bit! This high energy instructor has been facilitating face-to-face and online courses for PLS since 1988 and regards teaching as a mission not a job. Sue is knowledgeable about many subjects and is certified to teach nearly 20 PLS courses. When she isn’t in the classroom, you can find her singing professionally or feeding the duck that adopted her.
What was the best part about the course development process?
I realized the tremendous amount of hard work that our designers do in creating or re-creating any of our courses. In my case, April and I re-developed TTLC together and we were able to teach each other. I think we both learned many things. In particular, I learned that our designers are truly quite creative and dedicated, and their interest is making our courses what they are – the best online or face-to-face. April kept me on my toes and in order to validate what we know about learning channels, she even had me trek to university campuses to make sure our sources were credible. (Actually, I did this on my own because our research is extremely important and we must have “proof”. Ah, the smell of the stacks at a university).
What was the most challenging aspect of being a SME and developing the course?
The challenging aspect of being the SME was to keep the essence of TTLC. It is one of our “oldest” courses and it is based on a vast amount of research. However, we needed to update the research and in the process update the way in which participants can best learn the material. April and I asked questions and patiently listened to each other as we made collaborative decisions on what to keep and what to either change or eliminate.
What did you learn while developing the course?
I learned that we can stretch our thinking and include wonderfully exciting possibilities for our participants’ learning. We went beyond “read, reflect, write” and used the learning channels as we redesigned TTLC. I learned that it is important to get to the heart of the topic and that it takes all of us to make our courses work.
Do you feel that serving as a SME will influence your approach to facilitating in any way?
I was excited to see how the revised TTLC would go and now that I am facilitating the new version of TTLC, I do look at what we have done a little differently. I am watching the course unfold with different eyes. I am also looking at what the participants are posting and checking my thoughts about what was with what we now have. I really like what I am reading and many have written that they enjoy the course. Of course, I now know a whole bunch more about the nuances of course building and content needs.
Allow me to express my gratitude for having had the opportunity to be a SME. I hope I can be a part of the process again.
Judy Gehr, an educator and teacher for over thirty years, has been working as a Performance Learning Systems Facilitator for over 10 years. Judy has 32 years of experience as a classroom teacher for Caroll County Schools in Maryland, and now she currently shares her talents as a middle school math resource teacher working with all nine middle schools in her county. She facilitates both face to face and online courses for Performance Learning Systems and also acts as mentor for online courses including the Algebra course. Judy took some time to answer my questions and tell about her experience in helping to develop the new versions of STAR (Sucessful Teaching of Acceptance of Responsibility Online) and DI (Differentiated Instruction Online).
Judy Gehr
What did you learn while developing the courses?
Where do I begin? I learned so much this year revising DI and STAR. The instructional designer had so many creative ideas that she helped open my mind to new ways for participants to share their learning. Having someone take my thoughts and expand them into more engaging activities was remarkable. It is amazing how much goes into building a course and my hat is off the instructional designers. I think I took all of this for granted in the past. What a talented group of individuals the IDs are, not to mention patient, especially with me being a new SME.
What was the most challenging aspect of being a SME and developing the course?
I am such a sequential person that it was difficult for me to step back and look at the big picture. We worked more sequentially on DI so I felt pretty good about the process. With STAR we took a more global approach and with the help of a variety of STAR maps the ID created I was able to visualize the big picture. I think the global part of my brain is now a big larger!!
What was the best part of the course development process?
The best part was to see all of your hard work come together in a final product. It seems like you inch along for months and then when the end is near, it all starts to fall in place. Once you get a chance to review the final product you realize you and the ID deserve a pat on the back. The best next step is to facilitate the course and see how smoothly it goes!
Do you feel that serving as a SME will influence your approach to facilitating in any way?
This was such as amazing process that it will definitely influence how I facilitate. I have a much better understanding of the whole online process, which is very complex. I feel like my horizons have been broadened which should make me more effective as I facilitate. I have a deeper understanding of the course content and the way it should be approached. I even find myself looking at some other courses I facilitate and thinking how.
With 25 years of special education experience, Mindy Lower has spent many hours managing classrooms that others (myself included) might find challenging. That expertise, combined with her experience teaching multiple PLS online courses, made her a terrific Subject Matter Expert for the revision of our Classroom Management course. Mindy made revising this course very easy for me; she stayed right on schedule through the entire five-month development process and had tons of great ideas about how to revise the activities to make them more effective. Working with Mindy was truly an enjoyable experience for me.
To give you all a chance to get to know Mindy a little better and see the development from her perspective, I asked her to answer a few questions about working on this course. Here are her answers.
What did you learn while developing the course?
This was the first time for me to work with an instructional designer on writing and revising a course. One of the main learning experiences for me was discovering how a class is built. It was rewarding to watch the progression of the different steps that led to the final product of the course. I have taught for PLS the past two years, but this experience gave me more insight to how the courses are designed and developed which I think will help me as a facilitator. I also learned what the role of the instructional designer is and how important they are to the overall product. They are very talented people and I saw many different skills from design to analysis used in this process.
What was the most challenging aspect of being a SME and developing the course?
One of our main goals in revising CM was to update the course and take advantage of the newer online delivery tools that are now available to us. Each activity had to be evaluated as to whether it still fit our objectives, whether it needed to be revised, and what available technology tool would fit its intended purpose. With Sakai we now have more options such as wikis and blogs, but we had to make sure that we were fitting the tool to the learning objective rather than forcing an objective to fit the tool.
What was the best part of the course development process?
Working with my instructional designer was definitely the best part. This was my first time working on a project such as this and I was a little hesitant to try it. Christy, my ID, clearly laid out the process and walked me through it. It is amazing how the technology tools such as Google Docs and the availability of the internet allows us to complete projects collaboratively without ever meeting. It was rewarding to see the final project and to think that I had a part in it.
Do you feel that serving as a SME will influence your approach to facilitating in any way?
This experience will be influencing my facilitating. Since I have taken many online courses as a student in the past, I always try to look at a course I am facilitating through the eyes of the student. Now with the SME experience, I have more knowledge on how to evaluate a course and analyze whether the objectives and goals are being met. Being an SME has definitely given me more insight to the structure of the course which will help me be a more effective facilitator.
Last month we highlighted several new courses and course revisions that launched this summer. This month we want to take a look at the expertise involved in re-crafting an existing PLS course. In other words, how do we update and revise a foundational course while keeping the integrity of the course?
When we decided to update Classroom Management, Merging Educational Goals and Interactive Multimedia Projects, Successful Teaching for Acceptance of Reponsibility, and Teaching Through Learning Channels, we looked for experts to assist us in the process. Who better qualified as experts on PLS courses than PLS facilitators?
For the revisions, we tapped into the expertise of Mindy Lower (CM), Ginny Sharp (MEGA), Judy Gehr (STAR), and Sue Brien (TTLC) and experts they were! Over the next few weeks, join us as we interview these experts, share their course development experiences, and celebrate their successes.
As Pam, noted in the previous blog post we have a new course that focuses on the teaching of writing. Writing Across the Curriculum Online ® (WAC) features an in depth look at implementation and practice of the “Writing Workshop,” also known as “Writers’ Workshop.” Students of this course will have the opportunity to discuss the basics and challenges of establishing a Writing Workshop in their own classrooms. In a Writing Workshop, students at any grade level are continuously exposed to the process of writing during a regular period each day. A daily Writing Workshop typically includes the following segments:
A mini-lesson – in which the teacher shares a writing skill or craft such as using descriptive words or use of a type of punctuation.
An opportunity for students to try or apply the lesson in writing
Independent writing time – when students get to write often about topics of their own choosing
Sharing time – a time when students celebrate their writing by sharing it with others
The Workshop takes a constructivist approach to teaching writing as it encourages students to develop their own understanding and love of writing rather than make prescriptive demands on how their writing should be and look. Teachers of the writing workshop don’t just assign papers and grade them, they help grow the student as a writer. In addition, teachers must give up some control over student topic choice and act more as a guide by providing mini-lessons and coaching when needed.
Writing Across the Curriculum also shares ways to incorporate writing for learning in other subject content areas such as mathematics, science and social studies. Students of this course will learn about using math journals to reinforce mathematical concepts as well as use poetry and letter writing to teach both science and social studies.
Writing is an important part of how we communicate in our culture. Writing Across the Curriculum offers teachers a look at how to develop the life-long writer in our students. It also gives teachers the opportunity to practice and evaluate the lessons and activities which support Writing Workshop and integrate writing into all areas of the curriculum.
A place where author sharing happens
Additional information on teaching writing:
A brief slide show on the basics of the Writers Workshop:
As you can tell, the Online Course Development team has been busy and we want to share our excitement with you!
During the Sakai implementation, we continued our efforts to improve our existing courses while developing additional course offerings. After all, that is our goal for PLS! Over the past two weeks, you’ve heard about Classroom Management (CM) and Merging Educational Goals and Interactive Multimedia (MEGA), the updates and improvements you can anticipate, as well as, two new courses that will launch in June, Simulations and Gaming Technologies in the Classroom (SGT) and Reading Across the Curriculum (RAC).
But wait! That’s not all! Successful Teaching for Acceptance of Responsibility (STAR) and Teaching Through Learning Channels (TTLC) have also undergone extreme makeovers (and improvements)! The Designers and Subject Matter Experts were able to revamp the content of both courses to achieve a more interactive and engaging learning experience while maintaining the integrity of the courses. Would you expect any less of PLS?!
Looking ahead, three new courses are currently in development and plans are to offer them for Field Test in the fall. We’ll share more about these courses in the pending months, but I thought you might be interested in knowing more. The three courses are:
Writing Across the Curriculum
Thinking Mathematically: Elementary Edition
Foundations of Literacy: Beginning Reading
So what’s next? An Online Task Force submitted seven course proposals to the PLS Board for consideration. Two of those proposals were approved and negotiations with potential Subject Matter Experts are in the works.
As you know, our goal in Online Course Development is to create a variety of high quality courses that are interactive, collaborative and engaging for PLS students. We are interested in your thoughts about how well we are meeting this goal and ideas you have for additional courses or revisions. We want to hear from you!
This summer we’re offering two new courses, Simulations and Gaming Technologies in the Classroom (SGT) and Reading Across the Curriculum (RAC), both of which have gone through field testing and are ready to go. Both courses have many features in common: current educational theory, hands on activities, and collaboration to create new products.
SGT delves into why children learn from computer games and then asks students to develop a hands on lesson plan that uses a game as a learning tool. They are also required to play several different games, ranging from DinerDash to Runescape (all free to play), and then reflect upon why the game was effective (or not) and how it can be used in a classroom. Small groups collaborate to build games using a free game creation software that follows the basic guidelines of game design. By the end of the course students have a better understanding of how to use games in general as an effective learning tool within their classrooms.
RAC, while no less intense, focuses on how teachers can teach students to read regardless of the content area being taught. For content area teachers, the information and strategies in this course are invaluable. Students will discover how to:
incorporate before, during and after reading strategies into their lesson plans
motivate students to read
find materials & technology for their classrooms
create a classroom library
assess content area reading
In addition, RAC also offers several vignettes that allow reflective thinking about the content within the topic or module.
The next course in the Reading series is Foundations of Literacy: Beginning Reading. This course focuses on pre-reading milestones and how teachers can help any student achieve them. Keep an eye out for field testing later this year!
As a final note, we’re offering a new and improved Teaching Through Learning Channels this summer! A lot of hard work has gone into streamlining this popular course. It’s now even more user friendly, including up-to-date information and brand new hands on activities.
Each week for the rest of May we’re going to look at some of our upcoming new and improved courses. In addition to our usual development of brand new courses, we’ve all been working on updating and revising some of our older online courses. Over the last six months, I’ve had the opportunity to work with two facilitators to revise two of our online courses: Classroom Management and Merging Educational Goals and Interactive Multimedia Projects.
Revising courses is part of our continuous improvement process. I’ve never designed a course that I think is perfect; I don’t actually think it’s possible to have a “perfect” course. Something can always be improved. Taking several months to work on these courses is our chance to push them to be even better than they were.
One thing I discovered is that these two courses required very different approaches to revision. For one course, no significant changes in content or organization were required; for the other course, a significant amount of reorganization and new content was required. One revision was like painting every room in a house and replacing the furniture; the other revision was more like stripping the house down to the frame and completely rebuilding it.
Classroom Management Changes
CM will have basically the same content after the revision as before it. The module organization is the same as it was, although some modules have fewer topics now. No new strategies were added; the participant feedback on the strategies has been very positive, so we didn’t want to change that. During the revision, we focused on two main areas of improvement: activities and research.
Activities
Many participants used the words “repetitive” and “busy work” to describe this course in their evaluations. Others complained that the work was too easy or a waste of time. We addressed these complaints by removing a number of lower level activities. Some activities were replaced with work that was more appropriate to a graduate-level course, but we also significantly trimmed the total number of activities.
We also worked to improve the quality of the activities. The original online course only included one scenario-based activity; the revised course includes four. These activities will give participants an opportunity to apply the principles and strategies of the course in a realistic situation. We also revised the group projects to be more collaborative (another common complaint from students). The revised group activities also take advantage of the wiki, a tool that wasn’t available in Blackboard for the original version of the course. Rather than having so many assignments in the forums (in Blackboard, this course had over 40 discussions), some reflection activities will use the blog as a personal learning journal. All told, nearly every activity in the entire course will benefit from at least minimal improvements.
Research
In the face-to-face version of the course, the research is an appendix at the end of the binder. In the original online version, that entire research appendix was placed in Module 1. Rather than bombarding students with research before it’s useful to them, the research is now integrated throughout the course. Research on motivation, for example, appears only in the module where motivation is covered and where participants can actually use the information. Participants will also need to use the research more in the revised course; a number of activities now ask students to cite research supporting their decisions.
Each research section has been reorganized and includes key points that highlight the main conclusions of the research presented. The research has been formatted for easy reading and skimming online. (If you’re interested in the research on how people read online, check out the F-Shaped Pattern and other articles on Writing for the Web by Jakob Nielsen.)
Merging Educational Goals and Interactive Multimedia Projects Changes
Classroom management doesn’t change nearly as quickly as any content related to technology, and that’s a big reason why the approach we used for CM didn’t work with this course. The last few years have seen an explosion of new tools for creating multimedia online, many of them free. These tools open up wonderful new possibilities for using multimedia in the classroom, and updating this course gave us the opportunity to explore these new tools.
The inclusion of new tools meant replacing a lot of the content from the original version of the course. Some content, like the explanation of storyboarding as part of the project planning process, was retained, but almost all of the activities are new. The previous textbook has been replaced with a new book: Reinventing Project-Based Learning: Your Field Guide to Real-World Projects in the Digital Age.
Because so much of the course has changed, we’re treating this almost as a new course: we’ll conduct a field test in June and then not offer it again until January 2010 to allow time this fall for revisions based on the field test feedback. With so many new activities, I’m sure that some things won’t work right the first time. Fortunately, the continuous improvement process gives us a way to try new things while still having a chance to change later.
To give you just a small taste of the new online multimedia tools covered in the revised course, here’s one of the examples I created for the course. We really focused on real-world project-based learning, and I wanted an example that showed how students could use multimedia to communicate about issues that matter to them. (If you’re reading this post in email or an RSS reader, you may need to visit our blog to see the animated movie below.)
Don’t be fooled by how complicated this looks; this tool requires no programming skills. You pick your characters and setting, type your script, and xtranormal does the rest. They call it “text-to-movie.” The whole thing took me about an hour to complete, half of which I spent writing the script. (Although I did spend another 30 minutes researching hunger facts, but that doesn’t count.) With only a free account you don’t have as many choices for characters and settings, but I can see many ways to use this tool in education even without paying.
I think our participants will find the revised courses more engaging, usable, and relevant. I’m looking forward to hearing from all you facilitators when you teach these courses.
Last month we highlighted several new courses and course revisions that launched this summer. This month we want to take a look at the expertise involved in re-crafting an existing PLS course. In other words, how do we update and revise a foundational course while keeping the integrity of the course?
Each week for the rest of May we’re going to look at some of our upcoming new and improved courses. In addition to our usual development of brand new courses, we’ve all been working on updating and revising some of our older online courses. Over the last six months, I’ve had the opportunity to work with two facilitators to revise two of our online courses: 
