I haven't blogged about teaching lately--but I'm doing it, honestly, I am! The E-Teaching Seminars have been a bit less regular, and, in the case of Seminar #6, when Catherine Price and my sister Susan Zahner were visiting, a bit of a disaster (see the end of the blog for explanation).
Seminar #7, scheduled online for when we were out of town, didn't engender much engagement (when the cat's away...), so we covered that material the next week. We didn't get to do the best part (brainstorming) because I taught a lesson on Web Site Evaluation to students following the Seminar. Seminar #8, intended to be a content-intensive and integral to the rest of the Seminar program, was adjourned to an outdoor sidewalk cafe due to the arrival of Spring! But we're still on track--following the Easter break, we'll get down to the business of Designing Online Groups.
The topic of designing online discussion group activities is a main area of my interest, and, I believe, expertise. The nuts and bolts of activities intended to promote learning is consistent. Almost every online course includes some use of discussion groups (also called forums or bulletin boards). Eszterházy Károly uses Moodle to manage their online courses, and the forums available within the system are very similar to those I use in Bb WebCT. But the sheer availability of the tool does not ensure effective use--discussion activities must be designed.
The full PowerPoint with notes for this Seminar is available on Slideshare.net. I'll illustrate this blog with just a few of the slides.
I asked the faculty to think about discussion topics they might use in their classes, whether online, hybrid, or face-to-face. We discussed the various design considerations that govern who, what, when, where, and why we use discussions as instructional strategies. We also agreed that discussion as an instructional strategy is not without problems.
Unique to the online environment is the consideration of whether a discussion should be held synchronously (chat) or asynchronously (forum). That isn't a consideration in a face-to-face class! We discussed the advantages and disadvantages of each and agreed that, as in all instructional design decisions, the bottom line is the goal and objective of the activity to promote student learning. Many other considerations were examined--you'll have to go to the full PowerPoint to read about those--or come to the next seminar!!! Eger welcomes you.
About that Seminar #6 disaster--I put in that mention just to get you to read to the end of the blog. But it pretty much was! At the sidewalk cafe brainstorming session, we were discussing acronyms (I was explaining about NETS and CARS, two mnemonic devices used to remember web site evaluation techniques). Bert wondered if that was similar to K.I.S.S., and I laughed.
I had totally violated that particular recommendation for Seminar #6. I designed a "really big show", using WebCT, Live Classroom, Moodle, PowerPoint, and hands-on activities. I had a full house of participants. I had out-of-town visitors and the Vice-Rector and Head of the Institute of Media Informatics, Lajos Kis-Tóth.
You don't have to guess what happened...
But everyone was kind, I was professional in going with "Plan B", and we all adjourned to a wonderful session of "brainstorming" where the real teaching, learning, networking, and friendship happens.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment