Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Final Video Presentation

You can view my video presentation on Academic Dishonesty in Higher Education on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_uNwUxJ42M






REFERENCES

Academic dishonesty and plagiarism. Texas A&M University Libraries. (n.d.). Retrieved September 11, 2011 from http://library.tamu.edu/help/help-yourself/using-materials-services/online-tutorials/files/AcademicIntegrityAndPlagiarism.pdf  

College Cheating Story. [Video] (2008). Retrieved Thursday, November 10, 2011 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpPnjWP59MU   

Jones, D. (2011). Academic dishonesty: Are more students cheating? Business Communication Quarterly, 74(2), pp. 141-150. 

Jones, L. (2011). Academic integrity & academic dishonesty: A handbook about cheating & plagiarism. Retrieved September 11, 2011 from http://www.fit.edu/current/documents/plagiarism.pdf  

Satterlee, A. (2002). Academic dishonesty among students: Consequences and interventions. Retrieved September 11, 2011 from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED469468.pdf   

Witherspoon, M. (2010). Academic dishonesty of undergraduates: Methods of cheating. Retrieved September 11, 2011 from http://20.132.48.254/PDFS/ED518485.pdf

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please check it out and leave feedback.


Thank you

Sunday, November 6, 2011

Module 5: Static versus Dynamic Technologies Concept Map

Based on my philosophy of distance education I believe that I am in the middle of the static and dynamic contiuum. Because I am a person who enjoys integrating various forms of technology into my daily life (personally, academically, and professionally), I feel very comfortable using both static and dynamic forms of media and technologies to communicate, collaborate, and receive information. I feel that this Walden program is pushing me to use more dynamic media. For instance, prior to beginning this program, I’d never created or used a wiki or blog. I am thankful for the opportunity to learn how to use these technologies, and see how it assists in communication and collaboration with my cohorts and the instructor. And as I mentioned in another blog, the fact that these tools are free makes it all the more better.

Here is some additional information that I located in reference to media and technology being used in distance education:

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Module 4: Engaging Learners with New Strategies and Tools



The outcomes of learners are the same in any educational environment, traditional or online. However, the differences between the two environments lie in the resources/tools and methods/strategies used in delivering instruction to learners. There are specific teaching and learning strategies that have been identified to work best in online environments than do face to face (F2F) environments. The Three (3) C’s that will cause distance education to be the most effective for online learners are content, communication, and collaboration. The instructor and the learner must be active participants throughout the duration of the course in order for the learner to achieve the stated learning outcomes.

In the graphic organizer above, I have listed ways that the instructor can foster content knowledge within an online course because although the content itself is important, how the content is delivered is equally important. Additionally, the use of various technologies that promote communication and collaboration are essential as well. There are various ways for instructors to deliver content to learners, such as through PowerPoint presentations, podcasts, webcasts, blogs, wikis, video conferencing, etc. Additionally, there are various ways for instructors and learners to communicate with one another, including discussion boards (through learning management systems), blogs, wikis, email, and social networking sites, such as Facebook. As it relates to collaboration, the various communication tools are used to allow learners to work together on class assignments and projects. For instance, some of the same tools that are used to communicate, such as blogs and wikis, can assist in collaboration amongst learners.

Prior to beginning this program at Walden, I’d never created or used a blog or wiki to post information and communicate with my peers and instructors. Being that these tools assist with communication and collaboration, you have to also acknowledge that they are convenient, easy to use, and FREE!

References:
Anderson, T. (Ed.). (2008). The theory and practice of online learning. (2nd ed.). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Durrington, V. A., Berryhill, A., & Swafford, J. (2006). Strategies for enhancing student interactivity in an online environment. College Teaching, 54(1), 190−193.

Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. ITForum.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Here are some blogs related to this topic:
http://kofianane4.wordpress.com/2010/10/28/engaging-learners-with-new-strategies-and-tools/
http://belindavannorman.blogspot.com/2011/07/engaging-learners-with-new-strategies.html
http://undwd.wordpress.com/2010/11/14/engaging-learners-with-new-strategies-and-tools/
http://prezi.com/r4azmdisrbb4/engaging-learners-with-new-strategies-and-tools/ 

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Module 3: Assessing Collaborative Efforts

It can be said that assessment is as much about evaluating educators (their teaching methods) as it is about evaluating their student’s performance, as well as offering constructive feedback on the student’s performance. Siemens supports this claim when he says that “When we [educators] assess, we aren’t just assessing our learners, we’re assessing ourselves as educators” (Laureate, 2008). This is so because through assessment, educators and learners are able to engage in self reflection to determine how well the information is being taught, as well as whether or not the information is being learned. Assessing collaborative efforts in collaborative learning communities is just as important as assessing the efforts of individual learners. Just as it is important that individual students meet/master the standards set forth when the course was designed, it is important for groups to achieve the same goals.  
Palloff and Pratt (2005) says that “Given that well-designed online courses should be focused and centered on the learner, it follows that student evaluation within that course should be the same” (p. 42). Therefore, learners within a group should be evaluated both individually and collaboratively. For instance, to assess learners’ individually, educations can allow time for self reflection (as mentioned above) and the creation of a portfolio. With the reflection component, “students should be asked to reflect on their participation in the activity and their contributions to the group” (Palloff & Pratt, 2005, p. 32). Regarding the creation of a portolio, Palloff and Pratt (2005) says that “Creating a portfolio that includes both the individual contributions of the student and the final product is a good way for the instructor to assess how much work the individual student did and give the student an opportunity to showcase his or her work in light of the larger project” (p. 43). Overall, offering an individual component to a group project can be essential in determining exactly who is doing the work within the group project. For instance, if one of the group members does poorly on his or her individual assessment, then it could be determined that he or she did not make as big of a contribution to the group project as some of the other members, and thereby should not be given the same grade as the other members who possibly did the bulk of the work in the group project.
 
Just as learners should be evaluated individually when working on group projects, they must be evaluated collaboratively as well. Palloff and Pratt (2005) supports this when they say that “when assessing collaborative work…collaborative activities are best assessed collaboratively” (p. 44). Therefore, if one or more learners are not collaborating/participating in the group project as they should, they should not be allowed to remain in the group and receive the same grade as the group members who participated as they should. In an attempt to initially deal with this issue, the whole group should schedule a meeting to try to determine what the issues are and the best ways to solve the issues. If the non-worker(s) is non compliant and unwilling to produce after this initial group meeting, then the instructor should be notified and asked to get involved. It should then become the instructor’s responsibility to determine what to do with the non-workers. Furthermore, it is to the discretion of the instructor how the non-worker will be evaluated. Palloff and Pratt (2005) support this by saying that “after all, the instructor’s responsibility to record a final grade for the course and to follow up with those who are not performing” (p. 44).

In summary, Palloff and Pratt (2007) say that “The assessment of student assignments in an online course should not be the job of the instructor alone. Students should be asked to assess their own performance and to receive feedback from each other throughout the course” (p. 212). Therefore, assessment is critical in evaluating student’s performance and ensuring that they are achieving the necessary outcomes outlined by the course.  

References:

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2008). Assessment of collaboration. [Video webcast]. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5701360&Survey=1&47=9580570&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Building online learning communities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online: Learning together in community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Sunday, October 9, 2011

Video Presentation: Storyboard

Check out my storyboard (video created using Microsoft PowerPoint and Windows PhotoStory3). I welcome all feedback/criticisms/suggestions for improvement.

http://www.slideshare.net/jgreen83/academic-dishonesty-in-higher-education

Thursday, September 29, 2011

Module 2: Elements of Distance Education Diffusion

Of the three elements of distance education discussed by George Siemens, the one that I will discuss in great detail is collaborative interaction, as I believe that communication and collaborative interaction are heavily intertwined. Palloff and Pratt (2005) says that “collaborative activity is important in both face to face and online classes because it promotes the following: development of critical thinking skills, co-creation of knowledge and meaning, reflection, and transformative learning” (p. 4). As it relates to the development of critical thinking skills and the co-creation of knowledge and meaning, learners collaborating allow the learners to actually learn from one another… Through collaboration, “The ability to create knowledge and meaning is enhanced” (Paloff & Pratt, 2005, p. 6). This leads me to think about a quote by one great mind that says, ‘two heads are better than one.’ For instance, if I work with someone else, this allows me to consider perspectives other than my own. Finally, I say that collaborative interaction and communication are intertwined because in order to collaborate, there must be communication. In distance education, this communication may seldom times be verbal; instead it will be written, using various technologies such as email, blogs, wikis, social networking sites, video conferencing, etc.. Furthermore, to support communication, Simonson (2008) says that distance education “allows us to communicate in conversations outside of what we would have previously had.” Additionally, distance education isn’t just beneficial in educational settings, but also in “corporations by allowing them to interact with different offices around the world” (Simonson, 2008).

Reference:
Palloff, R. & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online: Learning together in community. Jossey-Bass.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer) (2008a). Distance Education: The next Generation. Baltimore, MD: Author

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Module 1: The Next Generation of Distance Education

Although there are some commonalities amongst traditional education and distance (online) education, they provide two totally different methods of educational delivery and should not be looked at as the same. Moller, Foshay, and Huett (2008) supports this belief when they say that “models of classroom instructional delivery and models of online delivery systems are vastly different; they should not be seen as one and the same (p. 67). This is so due to differences in pedagogy and instructional strategies, as well as the onset of more and various technologies within distance education courses.  For instance, Moller, Foshay, and Huett (2008) “The inclusion of technology often requires new skill sets, new ways of thinking, new time and resource management skills, new ways of communicating and new communication boundaries” (p. 68).

Furthermore, in the video, Dr. Simonson identifies the Equivalency Theory as a theory that is “based on the idea that distance education is not identical to face to face education, but equivalent... trying to make everything equal/identical is a fallacy – Courses should be designed around not trying to duplicate or replicate or make identical…” (Laureate, 2008). Because of this, it is important to consider how students learn, as well as which technology should be incorporated to support the learning process. This is what is most important as opposed to trying to make the distance learning experience the same as the traditional learning experience.

References:
Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008, May/June). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the web (Part 2: Higher education). TechTrends, 52(4), 66-70.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer) (2008). Distance Education: The next Generation. Baltimore, MD: Author